Skip to main content

Full text of "Four Hundred Years: Commemorative Essays on the Reformation of Dr. Martin Luther and Its Blessed ..."

See other formats 


Google 



This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on Hbrary shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 

to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 

publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we liave taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 
We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http : //books . google . com/| 




I 



16^ 



oo 



Jour l|unii»b ^mrs. 
/ 

Commemorative Essays on the Reformation of 
Dr. Martin Luther and Its Blessed Results. 

In the year of the 

Jnur-Ijimbrpiitl| Anniuprsarg 

BY VARIOUS LUTHERAN WRITERS. 

Edited by PROF.W. H. T. DAU. 




St. Louis, Mo. 
oonoordu publishino i 
1916. 



FOREWORD. 



A comparatively unknown priest and professor m a 
small German town on the border of civilization sought 
to ease his pastoral conscience by inviting the learned 
doctors of his day to discuss with him a very simple ques- 
tion of Biblical teaching and Christian morals: Can par- 
don for sins be sold and bought at so much per? There 
was nothing unusual in his action: hundreds of others 
had done the same thing before him, many more after 
him. Nor was the question difficult. There has never 
lived a person who has truly believed that a moral debt 
can be liquidated in hard cash. But in every age there 
have been persons credulous enough to become impressed 
with a pretension of mysterious spiritual power ; and there 
have been others of a shrewdly calculating disposition who 
have thought it a fine convenience to be permitted to 
settle their account, if not with God, at least with the 
Church, on the contract plan of Give and Take, rather 
than on the terms which the Eedeemer offers, when He 
says: Eepent and believe the Gospel! Every age, too, 
has produced enterprising men who would contrive in some 
way to accommodate these interesting religious bargain- 
hunters. 

Four hundred years have passed since the event took 
place. That is a sufficiently long time' for the entire aflfair 
to be forgotten. Few deeds of men amid the kaleidoscopic 
scenes of this fleeting life outlive oblivion. Luther^s pro- 
test contained the seeds of immortalitv. The world has 
assured itself long ago that there was wrapped up in that 
simple, but courageous challenge more than a cursory 
glance at the event in its external aspect would warrant 



VI FOREWORD. 

any one to assume. Not only has the original act of the 
Friar of Wittenberg been studied with unflagging interest 
during four centuries, but also the bearings of that act on 
the entire spiritual life of mankind have been uncovered. 
Aside from its immediate effect on the accredited form of 
the Christian religion of the day, there have resulted from 
it, more or less indirectly, great changes in the intellectual 
and social status of the race. Measuring the magnitude 
of importance that is now attached to the event against 
the insignificance of its original setting, one marvels that 
out of so little there should have come so much. Surely, 
this is not a mere man^s doing: this is the finger of the 
Almighty. The feat of slaying a panoplied giant with 
a ridiculous pebble hurled from the sling of a shepherd 
boy has' been repeated. 

Once more the world is preparing to review causes and 
effects of this remarkable event. In the form of histories, 
biographies, popular narratives, works of fiction, the Eef or- 
mation in Germany has been told by hundreds of authors. 
In thousands of monographs particular features of the 
movement have been subjected to minute investigation. 
Some years ago a brother, at our request, spent hours in 
the British Museum of London turning the pages of that 
part of the catalog of the famous institution that contains 
the "Lutherana." Vastly greater still are treasures of this 
kind hoarded by the libraries of Germany. It seems hardly 
possible that anything new can be written on the subject. 

The present volume of studies in the history of Luther 
and his work is put forth with no claim that it contributes 
elements hitherto unknown to the world's knowledge. It 
desires to be viewed, first, as a thank-offering to God and 
an appreciation of God's instrument in the upbuilding of 
His one, holy. Christian Church on earth. It is, there- 
fore, a record of the personal faith of the contributors to 
this volume and of hundreds of thousands of brethren who 



FOREWORD. VII 

share that faith with them. The individuality that is 
stamped upon these essays, and the variety of views which 
they afford of identical or related facts, has not destroyed 
the unity of the whole, but will^ it is hoped, lead the 
reader to the reflection that real unity is inward, not out- 
ward; it is not sameness, dead monotony, repetition, but 
the lively working together of the members of an intelli- 
gent organism, who, while acting independently and in 
conformity with their peculiar powers in their given tasks, 
still are obeying a common principle and realizing a com- 
mon aim. Secondly, the special studies here offered, by 
focusing attention on a particular feature in the character 
of Luther and his work or on a critical episode in his 
activity, exhibit the many-sidedness of the Reformer and 
the wealth of information that can be gathered by effort 
concentrated on a given point. It is always the same 
Luther that is portrayed, but he is shown in each case at 
a different angle of vision. Turning to any chapter of 
this book, the reader will get a fairly complete account of 
a subject, the materials for which he could not gather him- 
self except by laborious research in many volumes. In 
arranging the various articles, historical sequence has been 
followed in a general way, discussions of the more abstract 
subjects having been placed in suitable connections. The 
chronological table at the end helps to locate events in the 
panorama of Luther^s life. 

Four hundred years ! As the eye sweeps down the vista 
of centuries, and the dim past rises into view, the mind be- 
comes fascinated by the mighty struggles, the astonishing 
sacrifices, the noble faith of a heroic age. At first the 
world seems out of joint and a new chaos impending. Eut 
out of the confusion there rises a new order. Conquering 
truth stands triumphant on the battle-field. Owing to the 
folly and malice of men its coming was a challenge and 
the signal of war. It will always be thus: the assertion 



VIII FOBEWOBD. 

of truth spells strife in a world in which all men are liars. 
The spirit of Luther is marching on, leading to new vic- 
tories. But in reality the advent of evangelical truth four 
hundred years ago has ushered in a great peace and pros- 
perity. Coleridge probably knew too little of the Lutheran 
Church to be able to estimate correctly her valuation of 
Luther, but he is right otherwise when he says: "How 
would Christendom have fared without a Luther? What 
would Eome have done and dared but for the ocean of the 
reformed that bounds her? Luther lives yet — not so bene- 
ficially in the Lutheran Church as out of it — an antago- 
nistic spirit to Eome and a purifying and preserving spirit 
to Christianity at large." So is Froude right : "Had there 
been no Luther, the English, American, and German peoples 
would be thinking differently, would be acting differently, 
would be altogether different men and women from what 
they are at this moment." 

God bless the Church for which Luther labored, and 
speed her cause in every paijb of the world: the cause of 
the open Bible, of free grace, of saving faith ! May Christ 
continue to be to her what Luther proclaimed Him: her 
all-sufficient Teacher, her merciful Reconciler, her loving 
Shepherd-King ! 

Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, Mo. 

On the Festival of the Reformation, 1916. 

W. H. T. Dau. 



CONTENTS. 



PAGE 

Formation — Deformation — Reformation. (Dr. Abbetmeyer) 1 

Luther's Family. (Rev. Both.) ^ 13 

Luther's Successive Appeals. (Rev. Morhart.) 24 

Luther at Worms. (Rev. Broecker.) 36 

Luther and Erasmus. (Rev. M. Walker.) 49 

Luther and Justification. (Rev. Dallmann.) 61 

Luther at Marburg. (Prof. Biedermann. ) 74 

Luther the Faithful Confessor of Christ. (Prof. Bente.) 88 

The Three Principles of the Reformation: Sola Scriptura, 

Sola Gratia, Sola Fides. (Prof. Engelder.) 97 

The Open Bible. (Prof. Miller.) 110 

Luther and the Peasant War. (Rev. Schoenfeld.) 123 

Luther's Marriage. (Rev. Czamanske.) 138 

Luther's Two Exiles: Wartburg and Coburg. (Rev. H. 

Frincke. ) 146 

Wittenberg in the Days of Luther. (Rev. Koepchen.) 159 

Luther and His Friends. (Prof. Moll. ) 173 

Luther as a Preacher. (Rev. Fritz.) 188 

Luther's Influence on Popular Education. ( Prof. Kohn. ) . . . . 194 
The Economic Teachings and Influence of. Luther. (Rev. 

Pannkoke.) 206 

Luther a Lover of Nature. (Rev. J. W. Theiss.) 215 

Music and the Reformation. (Prof. Renter.) 227 

Luther and the Classics. ( Prof. E. G. Sihler. ) 240 

When England Almost Became Lutheran. (Prof.Th.Graebner.) 254 

Luther's End. (Rev. Haertel.) 268 

Tributes to Luther. (Rev. O. C. Kreinheder.) 277 

Luther and the Constitution of the United States. (Prof. 

Romoser. ) 294 

Lutheranism and Christianity. (Prof. Dau.) 301 

Chronological Table of the Age of Luther. (Prof. Dau.) .... 315 




Formation — Deformation — Reformation. 

Db. C. Abbetmeyeb, Concordia College, St. Paul, Minn. 

Although the Reformation of the sixteenth century has 
left its impress on many phases of modem life, it is of 
supreme significance as a religious movement, turning from 
the aberrations of popery to the eternal foundations, restoring 
the true conception of the Church and the mode of obtaining 
membership therein, and building up, on the model of the 
Apostolic Church of Christ, the Church of the Reformation. 
For a proper appreciation of this great movement no retro- 
spect from its consequences alone suffices; we must also and 
chiefly consider its antecedents, that is to say, the Formation 
and the Deformation of the Church, whose character and 
origins are depicted in Scripture, and whose deterioration 
and abasement is recorded by history. 

FORMATION. 

According to Holy Writ, God created man good and holy, 
and, even after the Fall, would have all men to be saved. 
Most men reject the grace of God; some, however, believe 
in Christ and have their sins forgiven. These, of whatever 
time or clime, are 'Hhe communion of saints/' "a chosen 
generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar 
people," to show forth God's praises; a kingdom of souls in, 
but not of, the world, believing in Christ, their King; 
a spiritual edifice, erected, not of dead, but of living stones, 
living children of God, who, living by Christ and in Christ, 
and having the mind of Christ, are fitted together — brethren 
all, though of various nations and stations — to form a holy 
temple and habitation of God among men; one holy Chris- 
tian Church throughout all ages, against which the gates 
of hell shall not prevail. God erects His Church by means 

Four Hundred Years. 1 



2 FORMATION — DEFORMATION — REFORMATION. 

of His Word, with which He endows His people to build 
itself up by preaching in the name of Jesus repentance and 
the forgiveness of sins, to grow stone by stone throughout 
the ends of the earth, and to endure until the scaffolding shall 
fall away, and the edifice, so long invisible to mortal eyes, 
is completed and revealed in imposing grandeur and glory. 

Wherever two ox more believers are gathered together in 
Christ's name, about His Word and Sacraments, the means 
of the Church's growth and the signs of its presence, there 
is • God's people, there is a visible congregation, mixed, it 
may be, with hypocrites, but in its outward complexion a con- 
gregation of God's children. Under the form of visible 
congregations the invisible Church within these perforins 
its duty of evangelizing the world, and enjoys the blessed 
privilege of communion with God and the brethren. 

In the apostolic days the temple walls grew apace, the 
kingdom of God came with power ; and the Apostolic Church, 
grounded as well as portrayed in the New Testament, will 
for all time continue to be the model Church. 

God established the early Church by means of His Word. 
Wherever Peter, and Philip, and Paul, and Barnabas, and 
Titus, and the other disciples went, their message was ever 
forgiveness for sinners in the crucified and risen Christ. 
"The Gospel," says Eusebius, "suddenly beamed on the earth 
like a ray of the sun." And everywhere was manifested its 
divine power. A breath of life moved over the vast field 
of death. Gainsaying Jews and dissolute Gentiles — men 
and women, rulers and slaves — in Jerusalem, in Samaria, 
in Damascus, in Africa, in Asia Minor, in Greece, in Rome, 
in the face of opposition and increasing persecutions, were 
transformed into believing children of the living God. The 
counsel and work was of God; no man could hinder or 
overthrow it. 

What was taught and believed in apostolic times we know 
from the sacred writings of the apostles and the venerable 
Apostles' Creed. The early Christians knew that forgiveness 
of sin was by grace through faith in Christ, that faith was 
IhB gift of God, that salvation was not for sinful man 



FORMATION — DEFORMATION — REFORMATION. 3 

a matter of merit and reward. They knew Christ to be their 
only Priest and Mediator, and themselves to have free access 
to the Son and the Father. They knew themselves to be 
a company and society of forgiven, converted sinners and 
therefore "the communion of saints," the spiritual temple 
and body and bride of Christ. They knew that the Church 
must have visible organizations for preaching the Word, 
and that in these God knows His own. 

The external organization and administration of the early 
Church was such as befitted the "royal priesthood" of God's 
children. In that community of brethren all were of equal 
dignity. Each member had for himself access to the Word 
and the heart of God, and to all conjointly had been given 
one office, the ministry of the Word, the Office of the Keys, 
a joint privilege and duty, to be performed, therefore, not 
by individual initiative or promiscuously, but "decently and 
in order," by the agreement of all. Accordingly, while the 
apostles preached by the direct call of Christ, all other 
preachers (termed "elders" and also "bishops," that is, over- 
seers, as we learn from Paul's letter to Titus and from his 
address to the Ephesian elders) derived their right to ad- 
minister in public the office of the Church from the call 
of the congregation, and they were thereby truly ministers 
of Christ. By its own equal and free choice (probably, by 
raising hands. Acts 14, 23) the congregations chose their 
pastors, even as. Acts 6, "the whole multitude" chose deacons. 
In matters of church-discipline, likewise, not an apostle or 
bishop, but the congregation was the highest tribunal, in 
accordance with Christ's words, "Tell it unto the church." 

The apostles, as inspired teachers and also as elders 
(1 Pet. 5, 1), instructed and advised; but aside from this 
they were brethren among brethren. They taught, as Christ 
had taught them, that in His kingdom greatness consisted, 
not in exercising dominion and authority, but in ministering 
and being servants, and that He had said: "One is your 
Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren." Thus Peter 
exhorts the elders not to be "lords over God's heritage" 
(1 Pet. 5, 3) ; and Paul upbraids the Corinthians for toler- 



4 FORMATION — DEFORMATION — REFORMATION. 

ating arrogance (2 Cor. 11, 20). Nor did they contradict 
and counteract their teaching by domineering practise. At 
the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) the apostles spoke, but 
when action was taken, we read : "Then pleased it the apostles 
and elders with the whole church," etc. Happy a church 
with such teachers! 

The Word of Christ established the Church and ruled it, 
and history bears witness to its purifying power in those 
cleansed with the blood of Christ and sanctified by the Spirit 
of His grace. Its high ideal of the Christian life becoming 
to the saints and children of God prevented the impenitent 
sinner from even outward union with the flock of Christ, 
and taught the Christians to keep themselves unspotted 
from the world, to respect the dignity and purity of woman- 
hood, to regard even the slave as a brother in Christ, to honor 
civil government, to succor the needy, and to do good to all 
men, in short, t6 order their daily lives wholly and strictly 
in accordance with their faith. Its regenerating influence, 
as it had turned a Saul into a Paul, transformed many 
a malefactor into a saint. Its consolations gave them calm- 
ness and confidence and fearlessness in the face of the 
bitterest animosity, to look away from the things of the 
earth to the things of heaven. Its prophecy of their Lord's 
second coming filled them with the joy of expectation. 

Thus the early Church in doctrine and, to a high degree, 
in life was a veritable garden of the Lord on earth. An 
enthusiastic faith glowed in the hearts of the Christians. 
The walls of the temple were growing, its early completion 
was expected. Paul forewarned them, however, 2 Thess. 2, 
that before Christ's second coming the Church must expe- 
rience the great apostasy through "the man of sin," who 
would exalt himself in the very temple of God as a god 
to deceive men unto their destruction. 

DEFOKMATION. 

• In the apostles' own times "the piystery of iniquity" was 
already at work, Satan scattering abroad the seeds of heresy 
and vanity to render Christ, the Prophet, Priest, and King 



FORMAJriON — DEFORMATION — REFORMATION. 5 

of His Church, the only Mediator, of none effect, and to usher 
in the Antichrist. 

During the early days of the conflict, the Church re- 
mained, upon the whole, pure in doctrine and life. Presbyters 
would not claim the ruling power belonging, as they well 
knew, to all saints. But with Christianity in the ascendant 
and the churches growing in numbers, wealth, influence, 
and worldliness, the Church came to be regarded, no longer 
as the invisible "communion of saints," but, by harking 
back to the old Jewish notion, as an earthly kingdom, in 
which the clergy (originally those chosen, elected) were an 
order or caste of rulers, and the laity (the people, those out- 
wardly connected with the Church) the ruled. Then in- 
fluential presbyters called themselves bishops, and bishops, 
styling themselves successors to the apostles, aspired to be 
great princes of the Church. This episcopal aristocracy 
claimed Christ's continual presence and His Spirit's guid- 
ance, His keys to bind and to loose, His protection against 
the gates of hell, as its own exclusive heritage and pre- 
rogative. In the interest of the unity and purity of the 
Church in the face of heresy and worldliness rather tKan 
for the aggrandizement of the episcopate, Cyprian based the 
episcopal authority on Christ's words to Peter (Matt. 16, 18), 
emphasizing the equality of all bishops, though conceding 
to Peter a certain primacy of honor. Here was the idea of 
a Universal Bishop, of the Church as a sacerdotal monarchy. 
The bishops of imperial Rome, the alleged successors to 
Peter, "prince of apostles," seized upon the idea as promising 
them even more than imperial glory and power. A voice 
beside them seemed to whisper: "All this will I give you. 
Ye shall be as gods!" In consequence, from century to 
century they asserted more and more definitely, insistently, 
impudently, threateningly, their right, as "vicars of Christ," 
to be the visible heads of all Christendom; and with con- 
summate zeal and ability, apt pupils of pagan Rome, now 
hiding their time, now forcing issues, now using "earth in 
defense of heaven," now "heaven itself to defend earthly 
possessions," consistently, relentlessly, they strove to make 



6 FORMATION DEFORMATION — REFORMATION. 

the vision a reality, to convert the primacy of honor into 
a supremacy of power. 

Protests were of no avail ; the times favored Rome. While 
the Eastern bishoprics bowed to the Eastern Empire and 
ere long, with the exception of Constantinople, were sub- 
merged beneath the tidal wave of Islam, the papal see, the 
Mother Church and only sedes apostolica of the West, in- 
creasingly independent of civil control, attaching to itself 
with the decline and fall of the Western Empire the imperial 
glory of "eternal Rome," allying itself in the turmoil of 
Teutonic migrations against the Arian menace with the 
Franks, found in this Germanic people, from Chlovis to 
Charlemagne, the rising tide that carried it to the supreme 
power. The papal claims, born of human ambition and 
Satanic delusion, based on misinterpretation of Scripture, 
and bolstered up with interpolations and forgeries, were re- 
pudiated wholly by the Eastern Church; in the West, how- 
ever, Rome carried through its program with magnificent 
success, until the pope held on earth, as he said, "the place 
of God Almighty." 

As "vicar of Christ" the pope was the head of a gigantic 
hierarchical corporation, which he called the kingdom of God, 
outside of which there is no salvation, for which he made and 
unmade at will laws and articles of faith, and participation 
in which he conditioned upon the administration of his 
sacraments by his priests. The Scriptures, as being dark and 
incomplete, he interpreted, supplemented, and perverted from 
apocryphal legends, the teachings of tradition, or his own 
fancy, saying in effect: "Search not the Scriptures; I am 
the Lord, your God; I am the way and the truth and the 
life." For his "infallible" ordinances he exacted uncon- 
ditional obedience as the price of salvation. His hand was 
laid on men in their education, their reading, their amuse- 
ments, their business. He touched them in this life and in 
that to come, regulating the purgatorial sufferings and 
opening or closing the door of heaven itself. He taxed all 
Christendom with tithes and fees. All authority on earth 
being derived from God, all temporal rulers were of necessity. 



FORMATION DEFORMATION REFORMATION. 7 

as no less a man than Augustine had taught in his City of 
God, subordinate to the pope, and bound to do his bidding 
or lose their thrones. Active dissenters were not only ex- 
communicated and di*iven out of reputable association with 
their fellow-men, but handed over to severe punishments, 
inflicted, at his instance, by civil authority. Thus a priest 
of the Tiber and his celibate abettors with spiritual sanctions 
and with fire and sword held men in bondage, professedly 
to save their souls. This was the ship of Peter, pope and 
clergy within, the laity struggling with the waves a^d im- 
ploring to te rescued. 

What, then, was the salvation held out to men by popery ? 
In brief, salvation without Christ, an achievement of men's 
own efforts, crowned by priestly mediation. Man was not, 
by means of the Law, shown his utter sinfulness, but led to 
believe himself possessed of at least some power for good. 
He was not, from the Gospel, shown that the merits of Christ 
are sufficient for the expiation of all sins, and that God for 
His sake forgiveth us all our sins. Instead, he was told 
that, as faith was to be accounted as little more than an 
outward confession of the Creed, works were necessary for 
salvation, chiefly works, and mainly such as the Church pre- 
scribed, as fidelity to the pope, auricular confession, mass, 
celibacy, monkery, invocation of Mary and of saints, by 
which a holy man might wax holier than required even to 
the winning of supererogatory merit. Man was told that 
the priest could forgive his sins, though obliged to aug- 
ment Christ's merit by offering up Christ again and again 
in sacrificial mass, and that he could impose penances, such 
as fastings, pilgrimages, flagellations, and the like, or com- 
mute these, for a consideration, into indulgences transferring 
to the sinner's account righteousness from the inexhaustible 
treasury of merits laid up by saints and managed by the 
priests. To be the more solicitous in works, man was led 
to tremble forever in doubt of the certainty of his salvation. 
Tndy, here was man estranged from th§ love of Christ, and 
delivered up to a greedy priesthood to his own undoing. To 
charm the senses, the pope tricked out his system with 



8 FORMATION DEFORMATION BEFOBMATION. 

gorgeous ceremonies and alluring melodies. But amid the 
pomp and pageantry of crowns and gowns and croziers, pro- 
cessions and genuflections, relics and rosaries, incense and 
chrism and candles and crucifixes, tinkling of bells and 
sprinkling of holy water, benedictions and consecrations, 
paternosters and Ave Marias, — a ceremonial not utterly 
remote from the prayer-wheel and other rites of the Dalai 
Lama, — where was the knowledge of the living God, of the 
loving, all-sufficient Savior from sin ? Under Christian forms 
men were offered for salvation the pagan creed of human 
works. Christ seemed to have died for the world, and 
established His Church in vain. The "mystery of . iniquity^' 
sat enthroned in God's temple. Rome gave its obedient 
children stones for bread. It fleeced the flock instead of 
feeding it. The house of God had become a den of 
thieves. 

How was it in those evil days with the spiritual kingdom 
and temple of God, "the communion of saints'^? Some few, 
no doubt, found the truth of salvation despite the delusions 
abroad. To speak the truth aloud meant papal anathema, 
dungeon, stake, and sword. The great mass of the people 
lacked true knowledge. Rome aligned whole nations into 
its outward organization, with accommodation to native 
prejudices, and the result was baptized heathenism. At best, 
its discipline helped to police unruly coromunities, but it 
failed to effect their spiritual regeneration. Had it but 
preached the grace of God in Christ Jesus with its divine 
power of touching and transforming the wildest hearts, the 
Dark Ages in less than the thousand years of papal domina- 
tion would have been radiant with faith and progress. Rome 
left the nations in ignorance of divine truth ; its indulgences 
were to the multitude a license to sin. Consequently the 
corruption of morals in papal times was appalling, and the 
abomination stood in the holy places. Rome was, indeed, the 
l^urple harlot of the Apocalypse, that paraded as the bride of 
Christ, making drunk with her wine the princes of the earth, 
so that they lent her their arm for the spiritual and bodily 



FOBMATION — DEFOBMATION — BEFOBMATION. 9 

destruction of the true bride; and the scarlet woman was 
drunk with the blood of the saints. The visible Church, — 
from its first estate, alas, how fallen ! 

Men sighed and groaned and cursed under the yoke of 
Rome, but could not break away from it, because, having 
lost true knowledge of Christ, they believed the pope to be 
the divinely appointed mediator between God and man. The 
false doctrine that the pope was "the vicar of Christ" led to 
the deformation of the Church, and was the barrier pre- 
venting reformation. It served to palliate all abuses. If the 
hierarchy gave offense by wicked lives, there was no recourse, 
since, in spite of everything, from the priests alone men 
must obtain salvation, or be lost. This doctrine sufficed to 
shackle the temporal powers. The Empire, representing in 
little more than theory God's political government, and the 
rising national states, infringing on the imperial claim of 
universality, — all were compelled, if need be by ban and 
interdict, and by incitement of the populace to rebellion, * 
to tolerate the papal revenue collectors and submit to papal 
political interference through the landholding prelacy de- 
pendent on Rome. This doctrine preserved the papacy as 
an institution, when in licentious Avignon it had become 
a tool of French policy and a source of grievance to all 
other nations, and when in the great schism it had become 
a reproach and byword of contempt. This doctrine had 
absorbed the Clugny reform movement and placed its ex- 
ponent, Hildebrand, on the pinnacle of power. To this 
doctrine the Mystics bowed in all their spiritual ardor. This 
doctrine was the excuse for fire and sword, for the slaughter 
of Albigensian and Waldensian innocents. This doctrine 
proved stronger than Wyclif and Hus and Jerome and 
Savonarola. This doctrine, like a magic charm, held the 
best of men under the iron scepter of the dragon throne, 
making them even carry fagots for the burning of saints. 
This doctrine forestalled every conciliar attempt at better- 
ment "in head and members," because in the popular con- 
viction the pope was by divine right the gatekeeper of heaven, • 
and therefore sacred and indispensable. The bishops made 



1 FOBMATION — DEFOBMATION — BEFOBMATION. 

their peace with Peter, not to their own disadvantage. 
Princes alternately fought or bought the pope. The evil 
continued. Men sighed and groaned and cursed, but bore 
their burden, because salvation came from Rome. 

REFORMATION. 

A reformation was sorely needed, but it seemed impossible. 
-Nevertheless, in the darkest night God had not forgotten 
His people, and in His own good time He reformed the 
Church, even as He had formed it, by the Spirit of His 
mouth, by the Word of His grace and power. He selected 
the time and the place, provided the man, and so ordered 
the circumstances and shaped the trend of events as to afford 
His work the conditions of success. The political embarrass- 
mejits of emperor and pope, the Turkish menace, Germany's 
lack of national unity, the fermenting economic discontent 
of the peasantry, the rising prosperity and independence of 

, the cities, the invention of printing, the revival of learning, 
and the occupation of such men as Reuchlin and Erasmus 
with the original texts of Scripture, the genius of Luther 
and his compeers, all the seething forces of the day, — aids 
all, not causes, of the Reformation, — God directed so to 
work together as to provide for His Gospel an entrance into 
the hearts of men, to dethrone the despot priest, and to re- 
establish the liberty of His children in His kingdom. 

It will be instructive to trace the main stages of develop- 
ment by which God trained and prepared the chief instrument 
of the Reformation, Martin Luther. Luther had been taught 
to fear God, and he strove, as few have striven, to acquire 
by the way the Church taught him the righteousness that 
had the approval of God. But neither his own works nor the 
services of priests or saints brought comfort to his soul. 
Then God led him to find in His Word the truth that 
righteousness is by grace, through faith in Christ the Right- 
eous, not acquired by merit of works, but the free gift of 
God. It was a discovery that brought him peace, one he 

• pondered over incessantly and hastened to impart to all as, 
to his simple belief, the actual, though obscured, doctrine of 



FORMATION — DEFOBMATION — REFOBMATION. 1 1 

the papal Church. What could he do but appeal against 
the unspeakable blasphemy of Tetzel's indulgences to the 
rulers of the Church, whom, despite the sins and abuses he 
had occasion to witness among the clergy, he regarded as 
divinely appointed? But, behold, bishop and cardinal and 
pope sided with Tetzel against God! Surely, they erred. 
God gave him boldness to speak out. And pope and cardinal 
and bishop bade him be silent, silent about what God Himself 
had spoken and had wrought in him! Nay, they placed 
upon him the excommunication of the heretic! And yet 
God's Word was true, and yet the doctrine of grace in Christ 
was true, and yet God still regarded him as His child and' 
a member of ^is Church; for — now he saw it clearly — 
the Church was not the visible Koman hierarchy, but "the 
communion of saints," the company of all true believers, 
each one of whom was a child of God and a priest of God 
with free access, since Christ's coming, to the Father's heart. 
With horror he realized the abysmal villainy of popery posing 
as intermediary between God and man to the exclusion of 
Christ. The pope? A blasphemous usurper he, "the man 
of sin," "the son of perdition," the Antichrist enthroned in 
God's temple! Luther feared God; he no longer feared the 
pope. God had made him free. 

Here was not a social reformer or a political agitator, 
not a philosopher exposing the fallacy of popery, not a cham- 
pion of the original rights of reason. Here was a soul in 
eager search of salvation, a man whom God had given the 
knowledge and peace of Christ, and strength to say to popes 
and to princes, to mobs and to thinkers: "We ought to obey 
God rather than men." 

Three leading truths Luther had learned by the grace 
of God: 

1) Christ is the Prophet of His Church, the only infallible 
Teacher. His written Word, the Word of God, is the saving 
truth, the only safe rule of faith and life. 

2) Christ is the Priest of His Church, whose one sacrifice 
atoned for all the sins of all men. Only God's free grace in 
Christ, the only and perfect Mediator, is the way of salvation. 



1 2 FOEll ATIOX DEFOBMATIOX BEFUBMATIO>~ . 

3) Christ is the King of His Church, its only Master and 
Head, and all members of His spiritual body and kingdom 
are brethren. 

With the glorious titles and offices of Christ the pope had 
inrested himself as "vicar of Christ,'' and corrupted the way 
of salvation; by restoring the way of salvation the Refor- 
mation emancipated mankind from iK>peiy to worship the 
living God in spirit and in truth. 

When the old Gospel message of the wonderful works of 
God again was heard, heard in the vernacular, as Bible-text, 
catechetical instruction, sermon, or hymn, the Spirit of God 
came in among men, and multitudes experienced with joy 
what Luther had exi)erienced. With lightning swiftness, as 
if borne on angels' wings, the Word spread from mouth to 
mouth, from land to land through Christendom. It achieved 
what no political or social discontent, no enlightenment of 
reason could have accomplished. When men once recognized 
in Christ their only Mediator and Redeemer, the fear of 
Rome fell from their hearts, they threw off the galling yoke 
of the tyrant and worshiped Jesus Christ, their Grod and 
King. 

The Reformation, while not territorially coextensive with 
the old-time domain of Rome, was in substance thorough and 
complete and final. It rejected all popish errors, and re- 
established all of God's truth. It gave back to men the 
Bible, the true knowledge of justification, and the spiritual 
priesthood of all believers. It evolved no new teaching. It 
was a return to the eternal foundations, a revival and restora- 
tion of apostolic Christianity, a regeneration. It established 
a church in which again, as in apostolic days, precious things 
were spoken, and in which a blessed people freely communed 
with its God; a church which, conservative in spirit, re- 
tained of the stately ritual grown up in the course of ages 
whatever was consonant with Scripture; a church which, 
tenacious of the liberty of God's children, declared the con- 
gregations to be the seats of authority, defined its inde- 
pendence from the State, and in time of need accepted the 
guidance of princes only as that of prominent members 



lutheb's family. 13 

of the church, pronounced the form of church-government 
a matter of Christian liberty, and forbade binding men's 
consciences with human ordinances as of like force with 
divine commands; a church which by a proper use of the 
office of the keys segregated offenders from the flock, which 
taught its members to honor hearth and home above the 
cloister of the celibate, to obey civil magistrates, and to 
regard labor in ordinary callings as of greater glory than 
monkery, and which in a thousand ways was an unmeasured 
blessing to the social, political, and intellectual life of man- 
kind. The Church of the Reformation was built, in essential 
conformity with the Apostolic Church, on the only and final 
oracles of God. Other foundation can no man lay. Beyond 
this it is not safe to go. To reform the Reformation, to seek 
further development of the Church along "modem" lines, 
away from Scripture truth, means another deformation, 
a relapse into the pagan, papal religion of works. 

The quadricentennial of the Reformation exhorts us to 
value our glorious birthright in the Church of the Reforma- 
tion, which as a free Church in this our land of freedom 
lifts aloft the torch of truth to guide us through the diffi- 
culties of life and through the valley of the dark shadows. 
Be it ours to maintain God's Word and Luther's doctrine 
pure, holding that fast which we have, that no man take our 
crown. Foes there are without number, but God is with 
His own, and will protect and prosper His Church, until the 
temple is completed, and Antichrist is destroyed with the 
brightness of our Lord's coming. 



Luther's Family. 

Abthub H. C. Both, Chicago, 111. 

Among the low, wooded hills of Thuringia, in the very 
heart of the German States, lies the little village of Moehra, 
It probably received its name from the character of the soil 
around it, which is to a great extent moorland, and but 
poorly suited to agriculture. The villagers of Moehra cer- 



14 LUTHER'S FAMILY. 

tainly earned their bread in the sweat of their brow, for the 
soil but poorly repaid them for their industry. Mining also 
was carried on here, as copper had been found ; but the yield 
was not so great as at Mansfeld and other places. 

As a village, Moehra was insignificant. It was affiliated 
with the neighboring parish, and though it had a little 
chapel, yet it was without a priest. The villagers were mostly 
independent peasants, who owned their homes and farms, 
while others worked in the mines. They were a hardy and 
sturdy race, and lived frugal, but honest lives. Their customs 
were plain and vigorous. They were ever ready to defend 
their rights with their fists, yet, withal, Christians, as Chris- 
tianity went in those days. Time and again the youngest 
sons had taken over their fathers' homes and farms, while 
the older brothers sought their fortunes in other places and 
other occupations. 

From time immemorial Moehra had been the home of 
the Luthers, and here Hans Luther had grown to manhood, 
and entered the state of matrimony with Margaret a Ziegler. 
However, as custom deprived him of the hope of some day 
taking over the paternal homestead, Hans thought he would 
seek his fortune in some other place, and so, together with 
his young wife, he emigrated to Eisleben, in the county of 
Mansfeld. Here he hoped to find a better opportunity of 
making an honest living by working in the mines, which in 
those days were flourishing in a way never known around 
Moehra. 

Here in the miners' quarters at Eisleben, on the 10th of 
November, 1483, their first child was born to the young 
couple, and, agreeably to the custom of the time, baptized 
in St. Peter's Church on the following day. Because it was 
the day of St. Martin, the child was named after that saint. 
Tradition still points out the house in which Martin Luther 
was born, though only the walls of the original house still 
stand. The church was later enlarged and called Peter and 
Paul's Church. It is said that the present baptismal font 
retains portions of the old. But so many miners were at- 
tracted to Eisleben that Hans Luther failed to realize his 



LUTHER'S FAMILY. 15 

expectations, and when Martin was only six months old, he 
moved to Mansfeld, six miles away. 

Mansfeld lies on the banks of a stream, is enclosed by 
hills, and above it stands the stately castle of the counts to 
whom the place belonged. The scenery ii^ more severe and 
the air harsher than at Moehra, and in general the people 
were rougher than the Thuringians. Hans Luther found 
employment in the mines, and his wife did all she could to 
help to support the family. "My father," the Reformer said, 
"was a poor miner; my mother carried in all the wood 
upon her back; they worked the flesh off their bones to bring 
us up." Gradually, however, things improved, and we hear 
that Hans Luther leased two smelting-fumaces from the 
counts for a term of years, and even bought a good dwelling- 
house in the principal street of the town. Though his out- 
ward prosperity did thus improve, the maintenance and 
education of his family was a constant cause of anxiety. 

Hans Luther bore a good reputation among his towns- 
men, and as early as 1491 was a member of the town magis- 
tracy. He associated with the best families, was personally 
known to the counts and was much esteemed by them. When 
Martin Luther had acquired fame, his parents frequently 
visited him in Wittenberg, and moved with simple dignity 
among his friends. Melanchthon describes Hans Luther as 
a man who by the purity of his character and conduct won 
for himself universal affection and esteem. "The mother," 
he says, "was a worthy woman, distinguished for her modesty, 
her fear of God, and constant communion with God in 
prayer." 

In their home the Luthers maintained their children in 
strict discipline, but they meant heartily well by it. They 
taught their children simple prayers and hymns, and as they 
themselves had been taught, represented God and Jesus as 
stern judges, whose wrath would only be appeased by securing 
the intercession of the saints. The Church and the pope 
were held in reverent awe. 

Not yet ^ve years old, Martin was sent to the town school. 
In bad weather his father or Nicolas Oemler, an older school- 



16 LUTHER'S FAMILY. 

mate, who later married Luther's sister, often carried him 
over the steep and long way to the schoolhouse. With dili- 
gence he learned the Ten Commandments, the Creed, and 

• 

the Lord's Prayer. He was also instructed in reading, 
writing, and in the rudiments of Latin grammar. The 
teachers, however, were extremely severe and rude, and 
Luther complains in later life that the examinations were 
like a trial for murder. Still there was no other schooling 
to be had in his days, and his father had decided to give his 
son all the education he could get. After finishing the 
course of the school at Mansfeld at the tender age of 
fourteen, we behold Martin leaving his paternal home with 
Hans Reinecke, whose father was overseer of the mines 
at Mansfeld, to take up his studies at Magdeburg. And so 
we also leave the family of Hans and Margareta Luther 
in Mansfeld, and follow the great Reformer into his own 
family. 

One day, in the fall of 1508, the good folks of Wittenberg 
beheld a pale and emaciated monk of about twenty-five years 
enter their city over the wooden bridge that crossed the Elbe. 
He had come from Erfurt and asked to be directed to the 
Augustinian Convent, where he was to find shelter and food 
with the brothers of his order. His departure from Erfurt 
had been so abrupt and unexpected that "Brother Augustine" 
had not found time to take formal leave of his friends; and 
his entrance at Wittenberg was just as sudden and informal. 
But he had come at the command of his superior. Dr. Stau- 
pitz, and by the will of the Elector of Saxony, to be one of 
the professors at the University of Wittenberg, which had 
been founded in 1502, and for which institution only the 
very best talent was being sought. At once our good friar 
engaged in his occupation, and, as was to be expected, de- 
voted all his time and his enormous energies to his new task. 
The wisdom of Dr. Staupitz in selecting Luther soon became 
apparent, and before long the renown of the young professor 
spread far beyond his university. 

But though his fame grew, he remained the pious and 
humble brother, and lived scrupulously and conscientiously 



LUTHER'S FAMILY. 17 

according to the rules of his convent. Little did he need to 
supply his daily wants. Often a few pieces of bread and 
a little salt made up his daily ration. His personal comfort 
he neglected altogether. Melanchthon says that for a whole 
year he did not take time to make his bed or change his 
bedding. The days passed too rapidly, and often there was 
not time enough for all the reading, writing, and studying 
that he wished to do. 

Thus seventeen years passed, and in them many great 
events occurred. The Ninety-five Theses had been nailed 
to the door of the Castle Church. Luther had faced Church 
and State at Worms, the New Testament had been translated 
into the country's vernacular, and the German people were 
drinking divine truth from its undefiled f ountainhead, and 
thousands of Christians had become divinely assured of their 
salvation by grace, for Christ's sake, through faith. Luther 
had been excommunicated and outlawed, and yet he lived, 
and his influence grew from day to day. 

A natural result of Luther's evangelical preaching was 
that monasticism lost its imagined virtue with the people. 
Matrimony again became a holy estate. Priests and monks 
realized the Biblical truth that it is not good that man should 
be alone. They had vainly sought to achieve the acme of 
holiness in the unevangelical, papal institution of celibacy, 
that man should be alone. Many, therefore, left their eon- 
vents, and took wives, and began to live as God had ordained 
it soon afer creation. 

At last Luther also, rather suddenly and without con- 
sulting many friends, decided to prove his teaching by his 
own example. To please his old father, and to spite the 
devil, he laid aside his monk's cowl, and repudiated his vow 
of celibacy, and in the presence of Bugenhagen, Justus 
Jonas, Dr. Apel, and Lucas Cranach reverently and in the 
fear of God took Catherine Von Bora to be his wedded wife. 
The marriage was solemnized by Bugenhagen, the city pastor, 
in the customfiry way, on June 13, 1526. Two weeks later 
a public celebration took place, at which his parents also 
were present. 

Four Hundred Years. 2 



18 lutheb's familt. 

The former convent, which during the last years had been 
occupied by only Luther and Brisger, the prior, now became 
the home of the great Reformer and his family with their 
many friends and guests, both illustrious men and poor 
students, near relatives and parasites. Now no longer were 
the vigils kept, nor the fasts practised, nor the hours prayed; 
no longer did the gloom and austerity of the monastic mode 
of living prevail. Through its halls and rooms now re- 
sounded the joyful laughter and singing of children, the 
pleasant conversation of Kate and Aunt Lena and the ladies. 
The old cloister had become an evangelical parsonage.* 
Instead of chanting the various liturgies to the saints, the 
Ave Marias, the matins and vespers, the household now 
joined in family devotion, praying the Ten Commandments, 
the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and Psalms. A new order, 
indeed, had been introduced. 

Though Luther's marriage to Catherine Von Bora was 
not at all romantic, yet he certainly loved her with a pious 
and pure affection, and Catherine willingly reciprocated hjs 
love. Luther's letters to his wife plainly show this, as do 
also remarks which he made about her to his friends. Li 
fine Christian harmony they lived together , and for each 
other. 

From morning till evening Kate was busy with the affairs 
of the house and garden. She purchased the necessary 
supplies, provided for the ever present guests, ruled the 
servants and maids, and cared for the physical wants of tha 
children*. The house was truly Kate's domain, and very 
seldom did Luther take any part in the n^anagement of its 
affairs. In fact, he had neither the time nor the inclination 
for these things. 

The simplicity of living which he had practised in the 
convent he kept up in his own home. As a rule, plain, but 
wholesome food was served to the family. Only on special 
occasions would finer food be seen on his table. In both 
eating and' drinking he was moderate. When away from 
home and dining more elegantly, he would write to his 



lutheb's family, 19 

Kate and tell her how well he liked his meals at home. At 
times, when sorely pressed with work, he would lock himself 
up in his study, and even forget all ahout his meals. The 
little physical exercise which he permitted himself, and which 
he certainly needed, he sought in his garden or at the turner's 
lathe together with his faithful old servant Wolfgang Sie- 
berger. 

Luther's family consisted of six children. The oldest 
was Hans, who was bom on Jime 7, 1526. He studied law 
and became counselor at the court at Weimar. Elizabeth 
died in early infancy. To a friend Luther wrote : "Elizabeth 
bade us farewell to go to Christ, through death to life." 
To another he wrote: "She left me with a strangely ill, 
almost effeminate heart," so deeply did the death of his 
little babe touch this great man. On May 4, 1529, his little 
darling Magdalene was born. She was a gentle and pious 
child, and never caused her father to be angry with her. 
Ketuming from a recreation trip in 1542, he found his 
darling seriously ill. She longed to see her brother Hans, 
who was attending school at Torgau. So Hans was brought 
home. Piously resigned to the will of God, Luther saw her 
strength fail her, and prayed tp God : "I love her exceedingly 
well; but, gracious God, if it is Thy will to take her, I will 
gladly know her to be with Thee." Shortly before she died 
he asked her, "Magdalene, my little daughter, you would like 
to remain here with your father, and you would also gladly 
go to your heavenly Father?" She answered, "Yes, kindest 
father, as God wills." While Luther knelt before her bed, 
weeping bitterly and praying for her delivery, she breathed 
her last. His next son was Martin. He studied theology, 
but never held a position. He was sickly, and died at the 
age of thirty-three. Paul, the yoimgest son, studied medicine, 
and became a physician of good reputation. His youngest 
child was Margaret. Of Paul and Margaret there is posterity 
living in oiir time. Martin never married, and Hans's only 
daughter died childless. 

Besides these children we find in Luther's home many 



20 lutheb's family. 

of his nephews and nieces. As eleven of these had lost their 
parents, he brought them up as his own children. 

Luther's love of children and his appreciation of their 
childish joys and ways is very beautifully shown in his letter 
to Hans. As this is without a doubt a classic piece of 
juvenile literature, we reproduce it here in whole as trans- 
lated by Preserved Smith. 

To Hans Luther at Wittenberg. 

Castle Coburg, June 19, 1530. 

Grace and peace in Christ, dear little son. I am glad 
to hear that you are studying and saying your prayers. Con- 
tinue to do so, my son, and when I come home, I will bring 
you a pretty present. 

I know a lovely, pleasant garden, where many children 
are; they wear golden jackets, and gather nice apples under 
the trees, and pears, and cherries, and purple plums, and 
yellow plums, and sing and run and jump, and are happy, 
and have pretty little ponies with golden reins and silver 
saddles. I asked the man who owned the garden whose 
children they were. He said, "They are the children who 
say their prayers, and study, and are good." Then said I, 
"Dear man, I also have a son, whose name is Hans Luther; 
may he come into the garden, and eat the sweet apples and 
pears, and ride a fine pony, and play with these children?" 
Then the man said, "If he says his prayers and is good, he 
can come into the garden, and Phil and Justy, too ; and when 
they all come, they shall have whistles and drums and fifes, 
and dance, and shoot little cross-bows." Then he showed me 
a fine, large lawn in the garden for dancing, where hang 
real golden whistles and fine silver cross-bows. But it was 
yet early, and the children had not finished eating, and 
I could not wait to see them dance, so I said to the man, 
"My dear sir, I must go away and write at once to my dear 
little Hans about all this, so that he will say his prayers, 
and study, and be good, so that he may come into the 
garden. And he has an auntie, Lena, whom he must bring 



lutheb's family. 21 

with him." Then the man said, "All right, go and tell him 
about it." So, dear little Hans, study and say your prayers, 
and tell Phil and Justy to say their prayers and study, too, 
BO you may all come into the garden together. God bless you. 
Give Auntie Lena my love and a kiss from me. 

Your loving father, 

Martin Luthee. 

Delightful were the social evenings, when Luther would 
forget all the worries of his labors, and the children would 
gather about their parents, together with the other members 
of the family. These evenings were spent with singing and 
cheerful talk. For one of the many happy Christmas 
evenings that the family spent together with Melanchthon 
and others Luther had composed our glorious Christmas song 
"From Heav'n Above to Earth I Come." Some days before 
he had been in deep meditation over this wonderful event, 
when his wife Kate had asked him to mind the baby a little, 
as it was impossible for her to attend to all her duties. Still 
having his mind on the Gospel story, he began to rock the 
cradle. The mechanical swing of the cradle went back and 
forth, while in his mind he saw the events of Bethlehem's 
field pass before it. The child rested quietly. It reminded 
him of the Child in the manger and the song of the angels. 
Unconsciously his musical nature was moved; he began to 
hum to the time of the swinging cradle; he finally began to 
sing, and his song was our well-known "From Heav'n Above 
to Earth I Come." On Christmas Eve he sang it to the 
children, and soon they, too, learned it, and all sang it 
to the glory of the new-bom Babe, while Luther furnished 
the accompaniment to it on his lute. 

Luther's parents often visited their famous son, but nev^* 
lived with him. When they were very old, he wished to take 
them into his own home, and to repay them for what they 
had done for him during his childhood. However, they kept 
up their own home in Mansfeld. His father died while 
Luther was at the Castle Coburg, in 1530, and his mother 



22 lutkeb's family. 

a year later. To each of them he sent a comforting letter 
before they died. 

Among the many guests who enjoyed Luther's hospitality 
for a longer or shorter time were Johann Mathesius, Hierony- 
mus Weller, Veit Dietrich, and G. Roerer. Mathesius was 
the first biographer of Luther. From the pulpit of his church 
in Joachimsthal he related the life of Luther as he had in 
part seen it lived, and as it had been told him by others who 
were near to Luther. Veit Dietrich was responsible for the 
written account of much of the "Table Talk," for he would 
often, even at the table, write down Luther's remarks. He 
also wrote down the sermons that Luther preached to his 
family when illness kept him out of the pulpit in church. 
Weller was tutor to little Hans. 

It is strange to see how in our day Luther's glorious 
books and treatises are overlooked more or less (nearly always 
more by those not of the Lutheran faith), while his "Table 
Talk" is quoted as the book which really shows Luther up 
best. It is true, his conversation at table was free and un- 
concerned. It touches many and various topics. It is very 
interesting. It was rarely premeditated, and nearly always 
occasioned by some remark or question of one of his guests. 
It was not written by Luther, and never printed with his 
consent, but, as stated above, by those who heard him talk 
4t table. He did, however, either during the meal or imme- 
diately after it, expound the Eighth and Twenty-third Psalms 
and also chapters 8 to 18 of Matthew, to assist Weller in 
his theological lectures. These expositions were later cor- 
rected by Luther and printed with his approval. 

Luther's income never was large. As a monk he depended 
for his living on the resources of the convent. He refused 
to accept pay from his publishers, although they grew rich 
from the rapid sales of his books. His services to the uni- 
versity also were really gratis, as he did not collect the 
customary fees from his students. Neither did his position 
as city pastor bring him any fixed remuneration. The Elector 
of Saxony had at first given him a yearly compensation of 



lutheb's family. 



23 



800 gulden^ equal to from four to six times as much in our 
money. He also made him a present of the former convent, 
so that he might use it as his own private home. Later on, 
Luther bought a little house near his home and three gardens^ 
and in 1640 the little coimtry estate of Zuelsdorf for 610 
gulden. The ^convent, which had not been completely built 
up, he finished, and the city council sent him stone and 
lime for this purpose. The King of Denmark gave him an 
honorary salary of 60 gulden per annum during his last 
years. Some noblemen regularly sent him supplies for the 
table, and others gave him costly presents of goblets, chains, 
and^rings. Luther estimated the value of these presents at 
1,000 gulden. But as it was impossible for him to pay the 
entire purchase price for the Zuelsdorf property, he states in 
1642 that he was indebted to the amount of 460 gulden. His 
income had in time increased, but so had also his expenses 
and his charities, and after his death Kate was obliged to 
t^ke roomers and boarders to make her living. So Luther, 
while he probably had a chance to make a fortune, never 
did it. He was content to have his daily bread, and would 
not seek the wealth of this world. He was, first, last, and. 
all the time, \he servant o{ God, preaching the righteousness 
that avails before God. 

Luther's family has ever been the ideal of the Evangelical 
Lutheran pastor's home. Since the Reformation the pastor 
has again become a man of family. He no longer lives in 
the seclusion of a wrongfully called higher state. He lives 
as other men. His family life is an example to his fiock. 
In his family the Word of God rules. Christian conduct is 
observed, and Christian ideals followed both as to rearing 
and educating of children. The family learns and 'lives its. 
faith, as it was done in Luther's family. 



24 J.UTHER'8 SUCCESSIVE APPEALS. 

Luther's Successive Appeals. 

The Most Momentous Period of Luther's Life. 

1617—1621. ' 

(Reference, freely used: Martvn Luther; His Life a/nd Works, by 

Peter Bayne, Gassell & Co.) 

Rev. C. C. Mobhabt, Cleveland, O.* 

"There was a reformation in Luther, as well as a Refor- 
mation by Luther." When Luther published the theses, he 
was sure that he stood on the Bible and the ancient faith of 
the Church. lie did not, however, see how much the Church 
had departed from the Bible and Christian truth. That 
knowledge came to him gradually during a period of conflict 
which ended only with his excommunication from the Church 
and the final emphatic refusal on his part to accept the 
authority of the pope or the authority of church-councils 
against the authority of the Scriptures. 

Luther's conflict with human authority and his firm ad- 
herence to Scripture is most clearly seen in his successive 
appeals: 1. from indulgence- vender to the pope; 2. from 
the pope ill-informed to the pope better informed; 3. from 
the pope to the council; 4. from councils to Scriptures. 

The celebrated Ninety-five Theses against the sale of 
indulgences had been nailed to the door of the Castle Church 
on the 31st day of October, 1617. That was the first great 
scene in Luther's life. In those theses, however, Luther did 
not doubt the pope's authority. In many of the theses he 
speaks, with indirect appeal, as the candid friend of the pope. 
•^'Christians are to be taught that the pope, if only he 
-were acquainted with the cruel extortions of the indulgence- 
preachers, would rather that St. Peter's Church were burned 
Tto ashes than that it should be built up with the skin, flesh, 
and bones of his sheep." Some of the queries, however, were 
<iuite pungent. "Why does not the pope release all souls 
from purgatory out of sheer impulse of thrice holy love? 
Is not this the most righteous of motives ?" And this question 
still rings on. If the pope can release, why does he not 
release all souls from purgatory without money and without 



i.utheb's successive appeals. 25 

price? Thus the theses spoiled Tetzel's trade, but neverthe- 
less presumed that the pope's meaning was in accord with 
orthodox Catholic authorities. 

Conflict, however, could not be avoided. The champions 
of the Church's forgiveness who were opposed to God's for- 
giveness rushed into the fray. The fiercest enemy. Dr. Eck, 
launched a book against Luther. All hope of peace within 
the Catholic Church was destroyed by the folly of its 
champions. 

In self-defense, Luther prepared a treatise containing the 
theses and a commentary on them. This treatise was Luther's 
deliberate and respectful appeal from indulgence-venders to 
the pope. He was firmly convinced that, in essentials, the 
Church was on his side, and that he was entitled to friendly 
consideration by the pope. Therefore he also addressed 
a personal letter to the pope. The treatise itself was of 
comparatively slight moment, but the personal appeal deserves 
attention. 

Luther begins the letter by observing that an evil report 
has been carried of him to the ears of Leo. He then lays 
before the pope a plain statement of what he has done. He 
had attacked the offensive and extravagant preaching of 
indulgences because it turned the authority of the Church 
into a scandal or a laughing-stock, and filled uninstructed 
minds with the most pernicious and impious errors. He had 
written privately to his superiors. Then the idea had oc- 
curred to him of publishing theses and challenging the evil 
in public debates. The manner in which the theses had 
spread abroad had been, he says, to him a perfect miracle. 
But what was now to be done? It was beyond his powcF to 
withdraw the theses from circulation. The best course seemed 
to be to put a supplementary comment upon the propositions, 
which he now placed before "the most blessed father." Those 
who had misunderstood him might now see how reverently 
he respected the authority of the Church and the power of 
the keys, how false had been the charges of heresy and 
rebellion hurled against him by his adversaries. In con- 
clusion, as an expression of the affection with which, from 



26 lutheb's successive appeals. 

.childhood, he had regarded the father of Christendoniy he 
passionately declares his wiUingness to submit to th^ judg- 
ment of Leo as the voice of Christ ruling in him. 
I This celebrated letter of appeal has been variously inter- 
preted. But it is certain that Luther never kept his promise 
to submit to the pope with implicit submission. J^uther 
himself, in subsequent years, looked back with bitter seK- 
reproach upon what he considered the besotted popery of tHe 
letter. He had taken it for granted that since the most 
majestic voices of the Church, such as St. Augustine and 
St. Bernard, spoke on his side, the pope would be in his favor. 
Instead of this, he found that the voice of Pope Leo was not 
the voice of God. His relation to the pope was that of 
a faithful officer to a traitorous commander. The pope had 
even condemned him before the treatise and the letter were 
issued. 

When the thunderclap of the theses reached the ears of 
Pope Leo, one of his attendants, Prierias, probably directed 
by his master, at once wrote an answer to them. Luther 
mentions the performance as early as the 7th of January, 
1618, but kept quiet. News of this attack was followed by 
the report that the pope had appointed Prierias and another 
person a commission to try Luther. Luther thereupon de- 
cided to deal with the reply. The champion of the pope had 
laid down, as one of the grand foundations of his argument, 
the following proposition: "Whosoever is not imbued with 
the doctrine of the Roman Church and the Koman pontiff, as 
the infallible rule of faith, from which even Holy Scripture 
draws its strength and authority, is a heretic." According to 
this, the Church of Rome and the pope take precedence of 
Scripture. Luther challenged the right of any man, or body 
of men, to exert authority over the Bible. Thus the Reforma- 
tion introduced nothing new. Roman Catholics who claim 
that Protestantism must be wrong because it introduced 
something new cannot charge Luther's appeal to the original 
inspiration with introducing a newer thing than the Bible. 
The open Bible was the great principle restored to the world 
by Luther. 



mTHSB'S BUCCESSIVE APPEALS. 27 

Justice required an impartial hearing and a fair trial. 
Here was a commission whose head had attacked Luther 
as a heretic, and which also cited him to appear at Rome 
within, sixty days to take his trial. This flagrancy caused 
Luther to disregard both the court and the summons. His 
willingness to submit to the judgment of the pope could not 
include submission to such a judge. With prompt decision 
he took steps to secrure that he be tried in Germany. This 
was effected by Frederick, the Electoral Prince of Saxony. 
The place was to be Augsburg ; the judge, Cardinal Cajetan. 
But Luther refused to wait upon the cardinal until a safe- 
conduct was provided. 
♦ The discussions were destined to lead to a new appeal 
from the pope ill-informed to the pope better informed. At 
first the cardinal was disposed to dismiss Luther with smiles 
if only he would acknowledge the sanctity and authority of 
the pope and the Church, apologize for words rashly spoken, 
and permit himself to be muzzled. Luther, of course, was^ 
unmoved. He told the cardinal that he would gladly recant 
if his error were brought home to him. He maintained that 
the Church and the best Catholic authorities were on his side, 
and that it must be proved that they were against him. He 
declined to take the pope's personal word in place of proof 
from the Scripture. The cardinal, however, declined to 
enter upon any attempt to convince Luther that he had been 
in error, and simply insisted that Luther recant. But grad- 
ually he was drawn into an exchange of arguments. Why 
should not a mighty and learned cardinal grant a few words 
of irresistible logic to confound a puny monk? He con- 
descended to show that the pope could grant indulgences 
because he had at his disposal a treasure of merit which could 
be dealt out, whether to living or to dead. Luther, however, 
was convinced that God alone could forgive sin, that the 
Church, exercising the power of the keys, could only recog- 
nize what God had done, and that a treasury of merit, distinct 
from the power of the keys, was a mere fiction. The only 
and infinite treasury is the treasury of Christ's merits. The 
blood of Christ, and not the fictitious treasury of the pope. 



28 lutheb's successive appeals. 

cleanseth us from all sin. In reply to this, the cardinal hit 
upon a short and easy method to silence Luther. "Pope 
Clement," he cried out, "had expressly declared that the 
merits of Christ were the treasure of indulgences." The 
debate, therefore, was at an end; he absolutely declined to 
have any more discussion on a matter which had been decided 
by a pope. When Luther continued tb press for further hear- 
ing, the cardinal finally consented to grant Luther to reply in 
writing. But when Luther presented his defense of the doc- 
trine of pardon by the grace of God, not by letter of papal in- 
dulgence, the cardinal fell back upon his position that Pope 
Clement had settled the matter. As often as Luther at- 
tempted to speak, the cardinal bellowed him down. What 
was Luther to do? Suddenly elevating his voice, he cried 
out with a vehemence that cowed his opponent enough to 
make him listen that, if Pope Clement could be shown to 
have meant the merits of Christ to be the treasure of indul- 
gence, he, Luther, would recant. 

The cardinal scarcely believed his ears. He soon broke 
out into ecstasy. Here is the book, then; here are the very 
words of Pope Clement ; now subside, thou preposterous little 
hornet of a monk! Cajetan himself reads aloud, with exul- 
tation, the very words in which Pope Clement affirms that 
Christ by the merits of His Passion "acquired the treasure 
of indulgence." But Luther cried out at once : If Christ by 
the merits of His Passion acquired the treasure, then the 
merits could not be the treasure. The price of a thing and 
the thing itself were as distinct as any two things could be; 
the two were no more the same than a cardinal's hat and 
the price paid for it were the same; it was one thing to be 
a treasure, and another to acquire a treasure. The pope's 
treasure was not the treasure of Christ's merits; hence in- 
dulgences and their sale were not of Christ, but fictitious. 
The laugh was clearly upon the side of the little friar. At 
this pass the cardinal, having lost everything, also lost his 
temper, and told Luther to get out of his sight. And thus 
ended the second memorable scene in the life of Luther. — 

On that same 14th day of October, 1518, Luther, under 



lutheb's successive appeals. 29 

the advice of shrewd lawyers, drew up a concise and energetic 
appeal from the pope ill-informed to the pope td he better 
informed. What Luther complained of was the cardinal's 
obstinate refusal to argue the question in dispute fairly on 
its merits. Towards the pope Luther had striven to maintain 
a sentiment of loyal hope. 

On his homeward journey Luther received the copy of 
an order which the pope had sent to the cardinal, directing 
him to arrest Luther, and convey him to Rome as a heretic 
unless he recanted. It is not certain that the cardinal re- 
ceived the order before the meeting, but he certainly did not 
dare to carry it out. The pope had blundered again, as he 
had done when he at first had considered the theses a mere 
squabble among' monks, and also when he delegated Prierias 
to meddle with the matter. ]!^or did better information 
change him. 

The following events led to Luther's appeal from the pope 
to the council. The worsted cardinal proceeded to unfold 
all the resources of his anger. In a letter to the Elector 
Frederick he demanded that Luther be delivered up for trans- 
mission to Rome, or, at least, expelled from his country. 
This letter was forwarded by the Elector to Luther. In reply, 
Luther, having been asked to relinquish his errors, demanded 
to be illuminated as to what those errors were. The cardinal 
had mentioned that it was an error on the part of Luther 
to hold that the recipient of a sacrament must be a believer 
in the sacrament to be benefited by it. Luther stated that 
he could not yield on this point. For if the priest by his 
consecrating formula could make the sacrament an unfailing 
channel of salvation, regardless of the spiritual state of those 
who receive it, then salvation is of the priest, and the whole 
system of the Roman Catholic Church depends upon that. 
But if it is the grace of God, accepted by faith, which saves, 
by means of the sacrament or the Word, then Luther, to save 
his life, could not give up his position. 

It is not surprising that new and terrible thoughts were 
crowding upon Luther. He was amazed that such men as 
Pope Leo and his followers should rule the Church. Already 



30 LUTHEB'S SUCCESSIVB AFPEAI/S. 

he suspected the pope of being the Antichrist foretold by 
the Scriptures. There were indications that the pope would 
try to kill him. The appeals had been futile. Therefore 
Luther resolved not to place himself in the pope's power. 
To secure the legality of his position he drew up an appeal 
to a council. The points involved were points yrhich con- 
cerned the whole Church ; the Church therefore should speak 
through its representatives at a free and general council. — 
But that, too, was not to be. 

The friends of Luther now entreated him to refrain from 
publishing accounts of his interviews with Cajetan, or his 
appeal to a council, or any other document likely to cause 
trouble with Rome. But Luther tells his friend Spalatin 
frankly that if he remains in Wittenberg, he 'will insist upon 
liberty of speech and writing. Thus Luther stood for the 
great modem principles of free speech and a free press. 
Luther also believed in the separation of Church and State, 
and never relied on the power of his political friends. These 
friends, however, helped him with magnanimous forbearance. 

When the Elector Frederick received Luther's masterly 
reply to Cajetan's letter in the form of a letter, the prince 
himself wrote a memorable letter to Cajetan, to be forwarded 
with Luther's reply. In it the Elector tells Cajetan that 
Luther had been sent to Augsburg to receive a hearing, 
according to Cajetan's own promise, and not a mere com- 
mand to retract. Frederick cannot possibly take Luther's 
heresy for granted, or treat him as a heretic unless he is 
proved to be one. Others also were disposed to doubt whether 
Luther's doctrine was indeed heretical. He therefore had 
sent Cajetan's letter to Luther, and now enclosed the reply. 
Frederick, supported by public opinion, was convinced that 
he could not do wrong in letting the Bible be seen by its 
own light. If the Elector had not taken this position, the 
main current of modern history might have flowed in a dif- 
ferent channel. 

Cajetan having failed, the pope appointed Charles von 
Miltitz, a German gentleman resident in Rome, to solve the 
Luther problem. This new envoy proceeded to Germany, 



lutheb's successive appeals. 31 

and had several unsuccessful interviews with Luther. His 
conduct was irreproachable; but Luther never changed his 
belief that the mission was hollow. The messages from Rome 
were too murderously severe, the professions of Miltitz were 
too friendly. The envoy, however, repudiated Tetzel, and 
acknowledged that, in the matter of indulgences, Luther had 
been in the right. The negotiations ended in an arrangement 
that Luther should have his case decided by the bishop of 
Salzburg, and that, in the mean time, he should suspend 
his 'opposition if the attacks against him were also suspended. 

There was, however, no suspension of controversy. It 
was inevitable that there should be a reaction against the 
onward impulse communicated by Luther. The first shock 
between reform and reaction was the Leipzig disputation. 
The combat was to be between Eck and Carlstadt, but since 
Eck in writing aimed his thrusts at Luther and not against 
Carlstadt, Luther determined to take part in the argumenta- 
tion on* the side of Carlstadt. His inquiry into the origin 
and grounds of the pope's power had led him to conclude that 
the Church of Rome had no divine right to superiority over 
other churches. Although he had no objection to admit 
a primacy of the pope under certain qualifications, he divined 
that the pope who reigned in the Roman court was the true 
Antichrist. Thus the question between Luther and Eck was 
the question of the pope and the Church. The shrewdest 
Romanists, however, convinced that their best policy was 
silence, disapproved of the discussion. 

The disputation at Leipzig began on the 27th of June, 
1619, and, like the theses and the appearance before Cajetan, 
constituted a memorable scene in the life of Luther. Eck 
defended the portentous error, which had for a thousand 
years kept the mind of Europe in thraldom, that the pope 
was the successor of St. Peter, upon whom Christ Himself 
had, in words recorded by St. Matthew, conferred the prinjacy 
of the Church, the keys of the kingdom of heaven. The pope, 
like Christ, m\ist therefore* be king over the kings of the 
world. All who refuse to submit to him pass beyond the 
pale of salvation. And this view, he averred, was supported 



32 lutheb's successive appeals. 

during many ages by a procession of illustrious fathers and 
divines. Against this, Luther contended that Christ governs 
now, and is the sole King of the Church,. who has not dele- 
gated His divine right to any man, any church, or any 
aggregate of churches. But this does not exclude church- 
government, or unity, or order and regulation, or natural 
leadership. The principles of church-government exclude 
lordship, and include the spiritual equality of Christians. 
The Church of Rome might, however, by human right, in 
virtue of a natural qualification, conduct the administration 
of the whole in virtue of a natural qualification, as the church 
at Jerusalem at first had held the lead because it possessed 
the most eminent men and rendered the most excellent 
service. A fixed papacy was not Christ's conception of the 
kingdom of heaven. And thus the Protestant Church to-day 
recognizes no lordship in the Church, neither papal nor 
Lutheran. Lordship in the Church is Komanism. 

A new turn to the debate was given by Luther's view 
that men are free to proclaim the Gospel according to the 
light of conscience and of the Bible. This was a view that 
had been held by some whom fervent papists looked upon as 
heretics. Accordingly, Eck, as Cajetan had done, took a new 
departure, and blandly inquired if this view did not bring 
Luther into association with the heretics of Bohemia. Luther 
felt the blow. He refused to be identified with the Bo- 
hemians, but added that among the articles of Hus were 
"many whose character was plainly and superlatively Chris- 
tian." The assemblage held its breath. "That is insanity!" 
exclaimed Duke George of Saxony. Hus had died by fire 
as an enemy of God and man; it was the Council of 
Constance that had sent him to the stake. It seemed plain 
that Luther must be a patron of heresy and anarchy. Eck, 
having the advantage of being on the popular side, denounced 
as damnable the teaching of Hus and Wyclif, that acceptance 
of Roman supremacy was not necessary to salvation. It 
became plain that the stormy discussion could lead to no 
afireement. Luther had not yet learned by sad experience 
"^rd men are to convince, how difficult to teach. 



lutheb's successive aj»peals. 33 

The Leipzig disputation was a landmark in the history 
of the Keformation because it afforded Luther occasion for 
the clear statement of his view of the Church. It can easily 
be seen that Luther's scheme of the Church was that of the 
New Testament. The disputation is also notable on account 
of Luther's first public recognition of Hus as forerunner. In 
speaking a clear, bold word for Hus, Luther struck at council 
as well as pope, virtually denying infallibility to both, virtu- 
ally asserting that there is, from both, an appeal to the 
court of conscience and the Word of Ood. The debate also 
impelled Luther into more thoroughgoing opposition to the 
I)ope. He began to see that it was not practicable for him 
to work within the Roman Church as an advocate of freedom 
and the Bible, and that it was his duty to assail Babylon 
from without. The right of private judgment, that great 
principle established again by Luther, was ever firmly main- 
tained by him even to a break with Rome. 

Luther's new attitude toward Rome was revealed in the 
publication of his Address to the Nobles and People of 
Germany. This address, if weighed in the scales of reason, 
would overbalance that of many a famous battle. At the 
outset he breaks down three rampart walls of Rome. The 
first is the claim of the pope and his priests to a superiority 
of the body of Christians. The second is the claim of the 
I)ope to interpret Scripture and rule in its name. The third 
is the claim of the pope that all proceedings with a view to 
reform are wrong unless they are initiated by him. Then 
he states the work a general council should undertake. In 
turn he then treats of papal pretenses, celibacy of the clergy, 
mechanical prayers, and church-festivals, miracle-shrines, 
papal dispensations. Antichrist, heretics, and death by fire, 
university reform and Aristotle, economical matters, agri- 
culture and trade, gorging and guzzling, the social evil, — 
closing words. From this publication may be dated the com- 
mencement of that sovereignty over the hearts and minds 
of his countrymen which Luther has always held. Luther 
became the educator of the masses and eventually the founder 

Four Hundred Years. 3 



34 i.i;thkb's suogebsivb aifkais. 

of the present public school system, — another great modem 
principle. 

The opposition of the papal party now reached a climax. 
Eck, Luther's antagonist at Leipzig, had, in his fury, gone 
to Borne, and raised all the powers of the abyss. Finally, 
the poi>e issued the world-famous bull of excommunication. 
Luther quickly made up his mind concerning it, for he per- 
ceived that it condemned Christ. He was, at last, "quite 
certain that the pope is Antichrist, and that the modem seat 
of Satan has been found." The bull condemned forty-one 
propositions representing Luther's views, Luther was charged 
with heresy for denying that the Church of Rome had been 
appointed by Christ to take precedence of all other churches 
till the end of time in virtue of His gift to Peter. It was 
called heresy to say that a pope has ever been in error. One 
of the heresies with which Luther was charged possesses 
unusual interest for the modem world. The thirty-third 
heresy of Luther is that he said : "To bum heretics is against 
the will of God." For twelve hundred years the Church and 
the State had bumed heretics. The proposal to repeal this 
law was now placed on the roll of Luther's infamies. But 
this repeal advocated by Luther is the charter of intellectual 
and moral freedom for the world, and must ever be remem- 
bered in Luther's praise. And Luther very fittingly answered 
the bull, not by burning papists, but by burning the paper. 

The area of conflict between Luther and Rome grew 
constantly wider, and now whole nations were involved. But 
Luther ever remained averse to the introduction of physical 
force into the Lord's battle. He had appealed in vain to men ; 
there was, however, no appeal to arms. Never for a moment 
did he forget that the weapons of Christian force are spir- 
itual. Nor could Luther own the authority of any earthly 
power to dictate law to conscience contrary to the great prin- 
ciples of freedom of conscience and the right of private 
judgment. He set forth the Bible as the only authority in 
matters of faith, and unswervingly refused to recognize any 
other authority. Luther's position is clearly stated in a letter : 
"Bv the Word has the world been conquered; by the Word 



luthee's successive appeals. 35 

has the Church been preserved ; by the Word will her breaches 
be repaired. And Antichrist, as he began without hand, so 
he will perish without hand, by the Word alone." He there- 
fore demanded that his cause should be judged solely by 
Scripture. "Scripture," he said, in effect, "is the law of 
heresy for Christendom. Convince me out of Scripture or 
by irresistible reasons that my doctrines are heretical. Then, 
and only then, I will recant them." Luther's constant and 
absolute appeal was to the Scriptures. 

The final test of Luther's Scriptural position in regard 
to Rome came at the Diet of Worms, April 18, 1521. This 
scene is a separate chapter. When Luther appeared at the 
diet, he profoundly distrusted the professions of the papal 
party on the subject of free grace. He was unalterably con- 
vinced that, apart from all doctrinal considerations, the yoke 
of the papacy ought to be broken from the neck of Christen- 
dom. He had absolutely no doubt that the claim of the 
Roman see to declare the meaning of Scripture, and to 
exercise dominion of the human spirit, was contrary to the 
purpose of Christ, and of deadly influence upon mankind. 
He knew also that the councils had erred. He could, there- 
fore, not concede that there is upon earth any person, church, 
tribunal, court, or conclave which can infallibly define truth. 
Therefore Luther declined to recant unless he were refuted 
by the testimony of Holy Writ, and his conscience placed in 
harmony with the Word of God. He would not do aught 
against conscience. 

Thus Luther stood on the open Bible and freedom of 
conscience — the greatest of all religious principles. And 
thus closed the grandest scene in Luther's life. Thenceforth, 
in the providence of God, the Bible was to rule supreme. 
And thus the world to-day, four hundred years after the 
beginning of the Reformation, still enjoys the blessings which 
it gave: freedom of speech, a free press, education for the 
masses, the separation of Church and State, the right of 
private judgment, and an open Bible. 



86 

Luther at Worms. 

Rev. W. Bboeckeb, Pittsburgh. Pa. 

Since the days of the apostles the fate of the Church 
never hxmg so dangerously in the balance as at the Diet of 
Worms, and never a man in all those fifteen centuries, before 
the Diet at Worms, swung the balance at the psychological 
moment so decisively for the salvation of the Church as, 
by the infinite grace of Grod, did Luther. 

Great, indeed, were Athanasius and Augustine. Yet what 
these and other early champions of the faith stood for were, 
in the main, but single doctrines in the structure of the 
Christian religion. Orthodox Christendom yet accepted with 
one accord the verdict of the Scriptures, and acknowledged, 
with Athanasius, Jesus Christ the true Son, begotten of the 
Father from eternity, and rallied around the standard of 
free grace raised by Augustine. 

But when God sent Luther, what were the conditions in 
the Church? What as to grace? Aye, grace there was, but 
not God's free grace in Jesus Christ, — grace, not Grod-made, 
by the blood of His Son, but man-made grace, made by that 
"man of sin," drunken with the blood of the saints; grace 
by fasting, by prayers to the saints, measured by the rosary; 
grace by pilgrimages to holy places, — and what not? Yes, 
even grace to the amount that your purse could stand the 
tax the hawkers demanded for indulgences. Grace it was 
by the grace of the Roman pontiff. 

However, not only had God's free grace been supplanted 
by papal grace, Christ Himself was dethroned, as far as His 
Church on earth was concerned. In His place had risen 
the usurper claiming to be the vicar of Christ. That "man 
of sin" had truly come, whom, prophesying, St. Paul had fully 
described 2 Thess. 2, 3. 4. As God on earth he ruled. The 
nations were shackled with Rome's endless chain of ecclesi- 
astical laws and rules, impositions and taxes. The pope's 
menials were ubiquitous. Like locusts his "spiritual" agents 
fell upon a country, devouring it and leaving nothing behind 
■^Ithy indulgences. The confessional was the chamber of 



LUTHEB AT WOBMS. 37 

horrors, in which all, regardless of station or rank, were 
subdued to the will of Rome. Hypocrisy and intrigue held 
high carnival. Kings and princes were set up or removed 
at will, murder and treason being no obstacle. And nowhere 
did vice in its blackest and most nauseating forms welter 
and wallow in such orgies as it did in the very courts of the 
"holy city." This is but stating the simple, though soul- 
distressing facts of history. 

We ask, How could this terrible state of affairs come 
about? There is but one answer. The very foundation 
upon which alone Christ has founded His throne in the 
Church, and upon which alone rests man's salvation, the 
Word of God, had been assailed, set at naught, destroyed, 
and supplanted. Since the sixth century the voice of God 
had begun to grow fainter and fainter, till it was finally 
completely hushed. God's temple now echoed with a tumul- 
tuous din of voices from councils, church-fathers, and scho- 
lastics. And above all this confusion of contradicting, strug- 
gling, battling was heard the roat of Rome. Having throttled 
the Word of God, the pope had succeeded in making his word 
the supreme law in Christendom. Christ no longer spoke 
to His Church but through His vicar. True, the dogma of 
the infallibility of the pope had as yet not been decreed, — 
that was left for these latter days. But practically the pope's 
word was accepted by the masses as the infallible Word of 
Christ. That was the claim: As the pope spoke, so spoke 
Christ. Hence, also the demand that all matters of Church 
and State be subjected to his review, and be determined by 
his decision. There was no higher tribunal for appeal. Woe 
to the recalcitrant offender! Ban, interdict, death, was 
Rome's vengeance. We need but remember Hus and Savona- 
rola, the Waldenses and the Wyclifites. 

After this brief review we . understand the true sig- 
nificance of Luther's trial at Worms. For, in reality, in 
Luther at Worms the Word of God was on trial; hence, 
Luther's victory was the victory of the Word of God. Let 
us see for ourselves. 

The diet constituted the council of the holy Roman 



38 LUTHEB AT W0BM6. 

Empire. Charles V, the youthful king of Spain, had but 
recently been elected emperor, chiefly through the influence 
of the aged Frederick the Wise, Elector cTf Saxony. For 
reasons brought to bear on him, he convoked his first diet 
at Worms, Germany, for January 28, 1521. At Worms there 
were assembled the dignitaries not only of the State, but also 
those of the Church : electors, princes, and estates, cardinals, 
archbishops, and other ecclesiastical representatives. Leo X 
was represented by a special legate, Aleander. The diet, 
however, was anything but a iiarmonious body. From time 
immemorial there had been a deep cleavage between the 
secular and ecclesiastical forces, each striving for supremacy. 
Yet each was a willing tool of the other when they believed 
their own interests best served. Hence, distrust, hypocrisy, 
and intrigue stamped every dealing between pope, and em- 
peror. Naturally, Church and State suffered alike, with this 
distinction, however, that the true Church of Jesus Christ 
had become the football of both, pope and emperor. 

It was not different at Worms. We behold there pope and 
emperor each constantly veering and steering for the best 
wind to gain advantage over the Other. Among the many 
vexing questions demanding immediate attention from that 
diet was the one raised by the monk of Wittenberg, Dr. Mar- 
tin Luther. In reality it was no, longer a question, but 
a condition. A grave state of affairs throughout Germany, 
yea, throughout Christian Euroj^e, had resulted from the 
single-handed doings of this Augustinian, professor at the 
Wittenberg University and pastor of the Pastle Church. 
True, humanly speaking, Rome had nothing to fear from 
the monk. Had he not until now been a most abjectly dutiful 
son of the "Holy Father''? Was not the very fact of his 
devout obedience^ to the Church the very reason of his quick 
promotions in holy orders, even to the forcing upon him of 
the degree of a Doctor of Divinity, and thus exacting from 
him the oath to teach God's Word only, and to defend it 
against all heresies? And even when posting those memo- 
rable Ninety-five Theses against Tetzel's shameful hawking 

'ndulgences, he never dreamed that the pope could or 



LUTHER AT WORMS. 39 

would countenance this disgraceful soul-trading ^ business. 
Borne treated the matter lightly. But Luther's leaven was 
working, and Tetzel was forced to decamp. The pope sent 
Cajetan to subdue the obstreperous monk, and to bring him 
in irons to Rome. But, vanquished, the cardinal desisted. 
Rome's ire was rising, for it began to suspicion the possi- 
bilities of the strife. Rome's prestige was suffering. Luther 
must be quieted. But how? The glib papal chamberlain, 
Charles von Miltitz, was sent, — but for naught. Popedom's 
greatest champion. Dr. Eck, threw his gage into the arena, — 
but Eck gathered no laurels. Luther's subsequent book on 
"The Babylonian Captivity of the Church" completely un- 
masked the abominations of popery. Rome roared. * It hurled 
the ban against Luther. Luther defied the pope, publicly 
burned the papal bull excommimicating him, and declared 
the pope to be the very Antichrist. — Since that 31st of 
October, 1617, momentous events had crowded each other. 
European Christendom had become a seething caldron, with 
Germany as a center. High and low, princes and eccle- 
siastics, burghers and peasants, had caught the new spirit, 
which foreshadowed the long looked-for reformation of the 
head and members of the Church. They recognized in 
Luther's battle their own battle, in Luther's fate either the 
freedom from, or an increased papal prostitution of, the 
Church. 

What was it that caused this tremendous upheaval? 
It was, forsooth, not the man Luther, poor Augustinian that 
he was. It was that which he stood for — it was the Word 
of God, That Word it was of which Rome had robbed God's 
people, but which God's grace put into Luther's hand when 
his soul was 'verging on utter despair because of his sal- 
vation; the Word in which his wholiD being became wrapped 
up, and which, therefore, his students and his parishioners 
must hear; the Word at the head of his Ninety-five Theses 
against Tetzel, saying, "When our Lord and Master Jesus 
Christ says" ; the Word for which, again, he demanded from 
Cajetan and Miltitz free course, without interference from 
man-made laws; the Word with which popes and councils, 



40 LUTHEB AT WORMS. 

as he showed to the chagrin of the learned Eck, ever had 
been at variance, and which smashes the pope's claim of 
a primate when it declares, "One is your Master, even Christ, 
and all ye are brethren" (Matt. 23, 8) ; the Word with which 
Luther was breaking with sledge-hammer blows the chains 
shackling the Church, in treatises like "The Liberty of 
a Christian" and "To the Christian Nobility"; the Word 
whose full light he turned upon the infernal institution? of 
auricular confession and upon the diabolical idolatry of the 
Mass, looming between them appearing the unmistakable 
imdge of the accursed Antichrist, the pope of Rome; the 
Word for whose vindication Luther, on December 10, 1520, 
cast the papal bull into the fire and his own defy into 
Rome's face. That Word of God it was in which was the 
beginning, middle, and end of Luther's whole work; the 
impregnable citadel, in which he had fortified himseK; the 
sole weapon he wielded, both in the offensive and in the 
defensive. — 

The diet was convened. What was to be done with 
Luther? What about his movement for reformation? These 
had now come to be the all-determining questions. The out- 
look was not very propitious, indeed, and the final outcome 
was: Rome's failure to know the time of its visitation. 
As to Luther, he hailed with joy the great opportunity to 
let his Lord and Master Jesus Christ be heard before so 
representative a body. Thousands would hear, and return 
home with the tidings of the new Gospel. However, many 
an obstacle had first to be overcome before Luther could 
personally appear, and plead his cause before the diet. Rome 
vras obstinately opposed to giving the "heretic" a public 
hearing. Rome is semper eadem, always the same, also in 
this that she loves to work in the dark. Time and again, by 
citing him to Rome, by commissioning Cajetan, then Miltitz, 
by repeatedly importuning Frederick the Wise, and lastly, 
by calling the emperor to her aid, she sought possession of 
Luther's person, in order to deal with him as she had dealt 
with so many other witnesses of the truth. Charles V, devout 
Catholic and pliable as he was, here showed the weakness of 



LUTHER AT WORMS. 41 

his character. He constantly was vacillating between self- 
assertion and fear of Rome. As for him, the pope would 
have made short work of the monk. But God had also 
among the great of this world His protector over His servant 
Luther. T^his protector was the very Elector Frederick the 
Wise of Saxony. He would permit no harm to come to his 
Dr. Martin. For this reason his memory stands out in bold 
relief beside that of Luther in every true history of the 
Reformation. He ^forbade Luther to obey the summons to 
appear at Rome. He, in company with other German estates, 
staunchly demanded that Luther be heard personally, and 
that, as a German subject, he be heard on German soil, in 
public trial. Moreover, remembering the fate of John Hus 
a century ago, Frederick and the German estates would not 
have Luther face the dangers at Worms unless he be given 
an imperial safe-conduct both ways, to Worms and back 
home. And forced to acknowledge the justice of the demands, 
Charles V granted all, much to the mortification of the pope. 

Thus Luther was summoned to appear, within twenty-one 
days, for trial at Worms, no later than April 16. Would 
he go? Indeed he would; but not to recant; this he might 
just as well do at Wittenberg. And go he did. On April 2d 
he started in company with several friends, the imperial 
herald in the fore, on what was more like the triumphal pro- 
cession of a victor than the portentous journey of an already 
condemned heretic. The papal representatives at Worms 
took fright. More than ever they determined to hinder the 
public trial. Once more they put all their power in motion 
to keep the Reformer out of Worms, or to imdo the safe- 
guard. The friends of Luther feared for his safety. The 
man of God, however, continued undaunted on his way; and 
to his friends he wrote: "If there be as many devils in 
Worms as tiles on the roofs, yet will I enter." And April 16, 
at ten o'clock in the morning, he entered amid a great con- 
course of people. 

And now for the trial. It was set for the evening of 
the next day, April 17. What was Luther to be tried for? 
Through friends he had an intimation that the trial was 



42 LUTUEB AT WOBMB. 

to narrow down to three points, to-wit, the papal abuser, 
the authority of <Souncils, and the primate of the pope, — 
all of which he had so valiantly attacked. Luther also knew 
full well that nothing but a recantation would satisfy his 
enemie^. The very citation to Worms had told tim so. He 
came prepared to make answer to the charges. — But how 
was the trial to be conducted? Since they had been unable 
to prevent Luther from personally appearing before the diet, 
the papal cravens had agreed on a plAn. Luther, already 
banned and branded a heretic, must be given the least pos- 
sible opportunity to speak. No open debate with him must 
take place. Xo other privilege must be accorded him but 
to recant. • With their wonted impudence they also con- 
sidered it beneath their dignity to acquaint the accused with 
the exact mode of procedure. And purposely, to allow as 
little time as possible for the trial, the hearing was set for 
the evening. 

The supreme hour in the life of Luther, indeed, for the 
Reformation itself, was fast drawing near. Four o'clock 
found him, surrounded by men from all walks in life, in the 
antechamber of the assembly-room of the diet. Finally, after 
two hours of waiting, at six o'clock, he was called into the 
presence of the diet. For counsel his colleague Jerome 
Schurf had been delegated by his elector. Without much 
ado the i^fficial of the Archbishop of Treve^ Eck, acting for 
the emperor, put to him two questions: 1. Whether he ac- 
knowledged these books (on a bench beside him) to be his 
books; 2i whether he would retract their contents, or persist 
in them. Immediately Counsel Schurf interposed, and, as 
a precaution, demanded first the reading of the titles of the 
books. Eck complied, and among others also gave the titles 
of writings which had never been objected to. 

Unprepared though he was for this procedure, Luther yet 
answered, in both Latin and German: 1. As to the books 
bearing his name, he acknowledged them to be his, and could 
not deny any of them. 2. As to his declaring, however, 
whether he was ready to defend or to recant everything, — 
this being a question of the faith and of the salvation of 



LUTHEB AT WOBMS. 43 

the souls, involving the Word of Gk)d, the highest and greatest 
treasure in heaven and earth, to be held in all honor, indeed, 
by us, — it would be arrogant and dangerous for him to 
declare anything rashly, as he might indiscreetly and without 
due thought assert and state as true either less^than the case 
demanded, or more than would^conf orm with the truth, both 
subjecting him to the judgment of Christ : "Whosoever shall 
deny Me before men, him will I also deny before My Father 
which is in heaven." "Therefore, I most obediently and most 
humbly pray your Imperial Majesty tor time for considera- 
tion, in order that I may, without injury to the Word of God, 
and without jeopardizing my soul's salvation, give a correct 
answer to the questions laid before me." 

Thus Luther. A consultation of the emperor and the 
princes resulted in the granting of his petition, though Eck 
must reprimand him for wanting more time. The next day 
he was to make his declaration, not, however, in writing, 
but by word of mouth. 

On April 18th the excitement was intenser and suspense 
at a higher pitch than ever during this whole period of world- 
imrest. What would Luther's answer be to emperor and 
pope? — As on the preceding day, Luther found himself 
waiting from four to six o'clock before he was admitted into 
the presence of the assembly. Eck again opened the trial, 
upbraiding Luther with inexcusable dilatoriness in giving 
full acdbunt, and then put the question left unanswered the 
day before, but in a somewhat modified form: "Wilt thou 
defend all the books acknowledged by thee to be thine, or 
at least recant in parl^?" The question was clear-cut, and 
understood by all because put in both languages. And 
Luther? Modestly, yet firmly, not overloud, but distinctly 
understood by all, he, in a well-considered speech, again 
acknowledged the books laid before him the day before as 
his own, guarding himself, however, against any unauthor- 
ized, surreptitious alterations, and admitting to no one but 
himself the right to interpret his writings. As to recant- 
ing, — the second question, — he begged them to consider 
that his books were not all of one kind. He divided them 



46 LUTHEB AT WORMS. 

opposed each other, — and I am convinced by those passage 
adduced and introduced hy me, and my conscience is hound 
in Ood's Word, I can or will recant nothing, since it is neither 
safe nor advisable to do aught against conscience. Here 
I stand; I cannot do otherwise. God help me I Amen," 

The die was cast! The answer upon which hung the 
whole work of the Reformation was given. It was: Not 
the pope, not even church councils, but God's Word alone 
must bind the individual conscience, must alone decide all 
questions of faith and life in the Church. In vain Eck 
raved for the authority and inerrancy of councils; Luther 
offered proof of error. In vain for a whole week the powerful 
in Church and State, in private and public conferences, en- 
deavored to overwhelm the Reformer with their arguments, 
with cunning, and with open threats. In vain they sought 
his promise to submit to a council which was to be called. 
Luther's one answer to all arguments and to all propositions 
was: "Rather will I lose life and limb than surrender God's 
true and clear Word." As to the outcome of the whole move- 
ment, he told the Archbishop of Treves to look to Gamaliel's 
answer: "If this counsel or work be of men, it will come 
to naught; but if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it." 
(Acts 6, 38. 39.) 

To the emperor, who in high wrath declared himself about 
to carry out the pope's bull, and commanded him to betake 
himself under the imperial safe-conduct homeward within 
twenty-one days, refraining from preaching or writing on 
his journey, Luther sent humble thanks for the safe-conduct, 
and assured him that in all his undertakings he had sought 
nothing but a reformation according to the Word of God; 
excepting this, he was willing to sacrifice life and all for 
his country. 

Thus he left Worms Friday, April 26. The trial was 
over; Luther stood condemned before the diet. In reality 
it was the Word of God which had been condemned. That 
they did not spill Luther's blood was not because they did 
not fully and earnestly desire to do so. 



LITTHEB AT WORMS. 47 

What was the immediate impression of the trial? Many 
were won over to Luther and his cause. The emperor, how- 
ever, declared: *^e shall not make a heretic of me." The 
papists were incensed because Luther had been permitted the 
liberty of so comprehensive an answer. They importuned 
the emperor to break the safe-conduct, and to execute the 
heretic on the spot. But the emperor would have none of 
that; German truthfulness and fidelity forbade. However, 
on May 26 he outlawed the Augustinian. 

Among Luther's friends there was great rejoicing. No 
one was more jubilant than Luther's elector, Frederick the 
Wise. He exclaimed: "Ah, how fine did Brother Martin 
show himself! What an excellent speech both in German 
and in Latin did he deliver before the emperor and all the 
estates! He was too bold for me." When the tidings of 
Luther's bold stand at Worms spread, prayers and hymns of 
thanks and praise went up to the Lord, who had given His 
servant courage and boldness to stand unwavering in the 
hottest of the battle against the hosts of darkness, to gain 
the victory for the Word of God. To the friends of the new 
cause the hammer-strokes fastening the Ninety-five Theses 
at Wittenberg had been like the touching of the single key- 
notes in the simple, sweet melody of the old Gospel ; but the 
melody had developed into a fugue, and now, at Worms, the 
powerful finale was opening up the grand organ of God's 
Word, drowning out the discords pope and council had intro- 
duced into the divine harmony of God's Temple. 

And to-day? Next to God's almighty grace, it is due to 
Luther's firm stand in the Diet at Worms that we even yet 
triumph with him, "The Word they still shall let remain!" 
For that was, indeed, the crucial test for the man and his 
work. We shudder at the very thought that Luther might 
have wavered, that fear for his person or a sense of his 
personal unfitness to guide the ship in the tremendous revo- 
lution which must surely follow, if his principles prevailed, 
or the alluring promises of the Romanists, might have induced 
him to change his course and to sacrifice the principle of the 



48 LUTHEB AT W0BM8. 

Word. Luther himself foresaw and courageously sounded 
the warning against the then inevitable dire consequences. 
Rome's hatred, bom of the failure of the attempted reforma- 
tion, would only have, if possible, intensified the already well- 
nigh insuperable papal tyranny over the consciences, over 
the Church, over the nations. 

God, in His great mercy, willed otherwise. His Word 
was again to come into its own. Luther was His instrument 
in bringing it back. Luther at Worms signifies the open 
Bible to the world. The work of the Bef ormation had passed 
its crisis. Like an avalanche it rushed onward crushing 
whatever Pope or Emperor would cast in its way. Rome's 
dam restraining the Water of Life was broken, and the 
Gospel of Jesus Christ, once again released, poured forth to 
work the miracle of salvation for hundreds, for millions. 
Twelve years after the days at Worms, Luther, reviewing 
the progress of the Word, was constrained to declare that 
such great things had been done by the power of God as no 
man could have either imagined or expected. 

And to-day? The open Bible, or "So speaks our Lord 
Jesus Christ," — that is the last decision in matters of con- 
science acknowledged in Christendom the world over. Church 
and State alike are reaping the fruits of Luther's Bef orma- 
tion throuffh the Word. None more so, however, than we, 
who are of the true Church named for the Reformer. We, 
therefore, of the true Evangelical Lutheran Church before 
others justly commemorate this quadricentennial of the 
Reformation. With fervent thanks to God for Luther, 
His instrument, we erect to the memory of the champion 
of the Word at Worms a monument, not of marble, not of 
brass, but of hearts bearing this inscription: 

God's Word and Luther's doctrine pur« 
Shall to eternity endure. 



LUTHEB AND EI^ASMUS. 49 

Luther and Erasmus. 

Martin Walker, A. M. 

It is a fact little known that less than two months before 
nailing his celebrated Ninety-five Theses to the door of 
the Castle Church at Wittenberg, Luther had framed ninety- 
seven theses against the scholastic theology, in which he 
disputed the wisdom of retaining the wt)rks of Aristotle as 
text-books. And it throws an interesting light on Luther's 
mind in 1517, that whilst he did not consider the indulgence- 
theses of October 31st worth publishing, he had published 
the earlier theses and had sent copies to his former pro- 
fessors at Erfurt as well as to some humanistically inclined 
friends. But even in these earlier theses Luther's theology 
is abeady quite well. defined. He dislikes Aristotle because 
his code of ethics is "the worst enemy of grace" (Thesis 41). 
He champions Augustine versus Pelagius and declares 
(Thesis 4) : "It is the truth that man has become a corrupt 
tree, and can will and do only that which is evil." — "It 
is false that free will can accomplish anything in either 
direction (good or bad) ; moreover, the will is not free, 
but bound." (Thesis 6.) — "The best and unfailing prepara- 
tion* and the only qualification for grace is the eternal election 
and foreknowledge of Gk>d." (Thesis 29.) — "On the part of 
man nothing precedes grace but inability, yea, rebellion 
against grace." (Thesis 30.) 

It shows us Luther in his true spiritual greatness when 
we find him disdaining the championship of the Humanists, 
these knights of the pen, — which proverbially is mightier 
than the sword, — even as he refused the proffered support 
of Sickingen and other knights of the sword. For this aloof- 
ness of Luther from those who would be friends was not the 
result of some cold, calculating policy. It was the inevitable 
expression of his innermost convictions. Whilst the literary 
men would claim him as of their own spirit in their demand 
for "free thought," for f reedoni of conscience, of speech and 
writing, they were not with him in. bowing to the supreme 
authority of Holy Scriptures. Whilst the knights fought 

Four Hundred Years. 4 



50 LUTHER AND ERASMUS. 

for liberty, they were little interested in the liberty where- 
with Christ has made us free. Luther saw all this. In 
neither party did he find that faith which is the victory that 
overcometh the world. Rather, then, would he fight his 
battles alone. His conscience was bound in God's Word; 
faith in Christ was his impelling motive; trust in God was 
his reliance. God was his refuge and strength. 

An English historian has very correctly observed that 
Luther's "very imperviousness to the intellectual, liberf lizing 
tendencies of Humanism made him all the more fit to be 
a trusted leader." (Lindsay.) How differently Luther's 
course would have shaped itself had he been under the 
influence of Erasmus and the Humanists, or had he com- 
promised with them, can be clearly seen in the life and 
reformatory method of Zwingli. The Swiss reformer had 
been under the influence of Humanism from his boyhood. 
In the formative period of his life he was strongly influenced 
by Erasmus. From him he borrowed his rationalistic theory 
of the Lord's Supper. This theory, moreover, was merely 
typical of his attitude in general to the Holy Scriptures and 
to all articles of faith; this whole attitude was Erasmian. 
Luther well recognized this in the Marburg Colloquy of 1529 
when he spoke those memorable words to Zwingli and his 
confreres: "You have a different spirit." And that different 
spirit obtains to this day in the Churches that have followed 
the lead of Zwingli (the so-called Reformed group of sects) 
as compared with the Lutheran Church. It is not too much 
to say that, had Luther been influenced by Erasmus and 
other Humanists, or had he, for the sake of peaceful co- 
operation, made concessions to them, the Lutheran Reforma- 
tion of the Church would never have come to pass. 

The relation of Luther to Erasmus, and the controversy 
between the two, calls for extended notice. 

Desiderius Erasmus was born in Rotterdam, probably in 
1467. He was thus about sixteen years older than Luther. 
Eorced into a monastery when a lad, he managed to leave 
it at the age of twenty, retaining a loathing of the monastic 
life. He studied at Cologne and Paris, and later traveled 



LUTHEB AND ERASMUS. 51 

considerably, residing for varying periods at Paris, at Lou- 
vain, in England, in Italy, at Basel and at Freiburg im 
Breisgau. He was truly cosmopolitan. In England he met 
and made friends of the Christian Humanists John Colet 
and Thomas More. But he and Luther never met, knowing 
each other only through correspondence and from each other's 
writings. Erasmus never held any official position. He was 
simply a man of letters, and, as the trade of literature was 
not a paying one, he was dependent on pensions from Eling 
Henry VIII of England and other princes. He was the imi- 
versally acknowledged prince among the Humanists, the 
Voltaire of his day. 

Together with other scholars of his time he bemoaned 
the evil condition of the Church. He decried not only the 
profligate life of the clergy, but equally so the popular con- 
fidence in mere outward religious acts and ceremonies. But 
his conception of a reformation was rather a renovation of 
morals than a purification from unscriptural teaching. 
Nevertheless, when he sent forth his first edition of the New 
Testament, he wrote in the introduction that he wished that 
women as well as men might read the Gospels and the Epistles 
of Paul; that the peasant in the field, the artisan in the 
shop, and the traveler on the highway should employ their 
time by reading from the Bible. He had a firm belief in 
the power of knowledge and enlightenment. He hoped for 
a peaceful reformation; he hated what he called "tumult." 
He could not bear the thought of a religious war. He lacked 
every quality that makes the hero. He feared to commit 
himself on any great question. Any expression of opinion 
was usually so qualified that, if need arose, he might (^ange 
or even deny it. Letters written at the same time, but to 
different parties, express contradictory opinions, and usually 
contain cautionary remarks, such as: "With your usual 
prudence you will show this to no one." His biographers 
confess that it is hopeless to look for truth in his voluminous 
correspondence. "No man knew better how to use 'if and 
^but' so as to shelter himself from responsibility." 

These traits of character are very illuminating when we 



52 LUTHEB AND ERASMUS. 

consider his relation to Luther. Up to 1520, his attitude 
might be described as one of passive friendliness; though 
to his credit it must be noted that in 1520 he put forth con- 
siderable effort with the powers of Church and State to 
secure a fair hearing for Luther. But after the Diet at 
Worms he became more and more estranged. He dreaded the 
suspicion of being a "heretic" like Luther, and in many 
letters he protested that he had been too busy even to read 
the writings of Luther. When a neutral position seemed no 
longer possible, and he finally decided to take up his pen 
against Luther, he first secured permission from the pope 
to study the writings of the condemned heretic. And several 
years after his controversy with Luther he wrote to Pirk- 
heimer : "How much the authority of the Church avails with 
others I know not, but it is so important to me that I could 
agree with Arians or Pelagians if the Church should approve 
what they taught. Not that the words of Christ are not 
sufficient for me, but it is no wonder that I follow as inter- 
preter the Church, upon the authority of which I believe in 
the canonical Scriptures. Others, perhaps, have more talent 
or more strength than I, but I rest nowhere so safely as in 
the certain judgment of the Church. Of reasons and argu- 
mentations there is no end." 

With this knowledge of his vacillating character and his 
supreme respect for the Church we approach his De Ltbero 
Arhitrio. 

A succession of events almost forced Erasmus to take up 
his pen against Luther. His patron. King Henry VIII, had 
written an attack upon Luther, on which the Reformer had 
given the king a most stinging reply (1522), showing no 
respect for his position. The king doubtlessly urged Eras- 
mus to help him get revenge. Meanwhile, in 1523, the fiery 
Hutten attacked Erasmus for his indecision (an attack which 
Luther very much deprecated), on which Erasmus replied, 
blaming Luther for disturbing the peace. In a letter to 
Zwingli, to whom he dedicated this reply, Erasmus summed 
up Luther's "errors" to be chiefly these: 1) Designation of 
good works" as in themselves sinful ; 2) denial of free will ; 



LUTHEB AND ERASMUS. 53 

3) justification by faith alone. The second of these Erasmus 
chose for the subject of his tract against Luther, partly, at 
least, because on it he could write so as to please Home, and 
yet not be compelled to recall what he had already written 
against the papacy. Moreover, it was a subject that appealed 
to his speculative mind, and one on which he honestly dif- 
fered from the Wittenberg Professor. 

Luther received advance information of the forthcoming 
Diatribe on the Free Will; and in April, 1524, wrote a kindly 
letter to Erasmus at Basel, beseeching him for the good of 
the cause not to create further divisions and offenses. 

To this letter Erasmus replied courteously, declaring that, 
since Luther felt called to give an account of his faith, he 
must accord the same privilege to others no less zealous for 
the Gospel. Months before this, however, Erasmus had sub- 
mitted a draft of his tract to King Henry, and so in the 
course of 1624 the Diatribe on Free Will was published. 

Li the introduction he was at pains to preserve his stand- 
ing with the Church. He has no confidence in the clarity of 
Scriptures; they need an interpreter. As for himself, he 
is ever ready to abide by the interpretation of the Church. 
Eor individuals, like Luther, to appeal independently to 
the Scriptures upsets all certainty. "Moreover," he writes, 
"I take so little pleasure in positive assertions that I would 
readily join the skeptics, were it not for the inviolable au- 
thority of Holy Writ and the decrees of the Church, to which 
I readily subject my reason, whether I am able or not to 
comprehend her directions." Accordingly, we look in vain 
for any original treatment of the question or for any positive 
convictions. "As respects my opinion, I confess that the 
early writers teach much regarding free will, on which I as 
yet have no positive conviction, except that / hold that free 
will is possessed of some power." (§ 2.) And so he quotes 
various opinions; but such terms as "It is probable," "It is 
likely," 'Whether it be so I know not," creep in again and 
again. To believe in a providential overruling of our lives 
he thinks enough, "without delving into such questions as . . . 
whether our will is active in matters pertaining to our salva- 



54 LUTHEB a:?d ebasmus. 

tion, or whether it be merely passive over against God's 
eflGicient grace." (§ 2.) He cites not a few Scripture- 
passages; but his exegesis is not always sound; he mis- 
applies passages, and his illustrations are not to the point. 
Incidentally he (probably unintentionally) misinterprets 
some of Luther's statements. 

In the fifth century an errorist named Pelagius had 
taught that God did not demand what He knew man could 
not perform ; that man could do the will of God without the 
aid of grace, though less easily than when assisted by grace; 
that man, by the proper exercise of his free will, might 
acquire faith and prepare himself for grace. Pelagius found 
quite a following, and his error permeated the theology of 
the Middle Ages in the milder form of Semi-Pelagianism. 
However, since the Church, under the leadership of the great 
teacher Augustine, had formally rejected Pelagianism as 
a heresy, Erasmus did not want to be understood as being 
guilty of Pelagianism. As a matter of fact he was, though 
in its modified form. (Luther, however, in his reply declared 
him worse than Pelagius.) "Pelagius," he admits, "ascribed 
too much to free will," but adds : "Luther first mutilated free 
will by chopping off his right arm. Not content therewith, 
he struck him down and cleared him away entirely." (§ 41.) 

Erasmus touched upon the real crux of the matter in this 
passage: "They" (Luther and his like) "exaggerate original 
sin beyond all measure, declaring that by it the most splendid 
powers of our human nature are so corrupted that of our- 
selves we can do no more than to be ignorant of God and 
hate Him." Erasmus had no deep sense of sin, as did Luther, 
and hence could not appreciate the absolute need of divine 
grace. Though he declared that all glory for the salvation 
of sinners should belong to Christ, in other statements he 
credited not a little to the virtue of man. This sentence, 
near the close (§ 42), practically sums up the position taken 
in the Diatribe: "I am pleased with the opinion of those 
who ascribe something to free will, but most to grace." 

Luther waited a whole year before replying to the Dia- 
tribe. It was an especially trying year for him, with the 



LUTHEB A^'D EBASMUS. 55 

Peasant's Revolt, his marriage, and other weighty matters 
to occupy him. However, Luther gave as the real reason for 
the delay his aversion to making reply to so unworthy a tract. 
It was only because he feared that his silence would be mis- 
interpreted that he could bring himself to write a counter- 
tract. But once undertaken, he did the work with customary 
zeal and thoroughness, in this case also paying special 
attention to his Latin and to the form of the composition. 

In December, 1625, Luther published his book under the 
title: On the Unfree Will, which Jonas immediately trans- 
lated into German, with the title: That Free Will Is Nothing. 

In the preface Luther expresses his disappointment that 
Erasmus, to whom he concedes superiority in intellectual 
and rhetorical ability and in the knowledge of the languages, 
should not have made out a better case for himself. He 
asserts 'that Erasmus had brought forward nothing new; 
that his arguments had been demolished in advanqe by 
Melanchthon in his recently published Doctrinal Theology 
(Loci Communes). He chides the Humanist for being 
"slippery'' in his use of wor8s and very shifty in his argu- 
mentation. Thereupon Luther maintains the clarity and 
infallibility of Holy Scriptures, asserting that from them 
a Christian can and should gain full certitude for his faith. 
The Holy Ghost is no skeptic. Without positive truth there 
can be no Christianity. As regards free will, this is not 
a question on which a Christian might well be left in 
ignorance. We must know what ability we have over against 
God, and what not ; else will we not properly venerate, praise^ 
and serve Him. In the following words Luther defines the 
term "free will": — 

"Now, if we are not ready altogether to drop this term, — 
which would be by far the safer and more Christian thing 
to do, — we should at least teach that the term is used in 
good faith only when a free will is conceded to mai^ not 
with respect to things that are above him, but only with 
respect to things below him; that is, man should know 
that in his temporal possessions he has the power to use, to 
do or leave undone, according to his own free will ; although 



56 LITTHEB AND ERASMUS. 

even this is controlled by God's free will, as it pleases Him, 
But over against God, or in matters pertaining to salvation 
or damnation, man has no free will, but is bound, subjected 
as a servant to the free will of God 9r to the will of the 
devil." 

Thereupon Luther proceeds to take up for discussion each 
point of the Diatribe, He makes reply to each opinion sub- 
mitted by Erasmus, copiously quoting Scripture to maintain 
his own position. Everywhere Luther speaks with positive 
conviction. As a result of the fall into sin, man's whole 
nature is depraved ; the will is not free, but bound, a slave to 
Satan; no man can of himself, of his own will, accomplish, 
or even desire; aught that is good in God's sight. Every 
impulse toward that which is good must emanate from God. 
When man turns from sin to righteousness ; when he accepts 
the salvation in Christ; when he believes and begins to do 
^*good works": all this is the result of God's calling and 
drawing, which itself is consequent upon Gk)d's eternal decree 
of grace in predestination. All this is, of course, offensive 
to human pride and far above human reason (Ps. 73, 22: 
^*So foolish was I and ignorant; I was as a beast before 
Thee") ; but all this is the clear teaching of God's Word, and 
must therefore be simply believed. All this is also .very 
comforting to the believer, who thus knows his salvation de- 
pendent not upon his own fickle will, but upon the un- 
jchanging will and grace of God. 

"Take the example," he says, "in Rom. 10, 20, adduced 
from Isaiah: 'I was found of them that sought Me not; 
T was made manifest unto* them that asked not after Me.' 
This he says of the heathen, that unto them it had been 
given to hear and to know Christ, although previously they 
could not have had so much as a thought of Christ, much 
less seek Him or with the powers of free will to prepare 
themselves for Him. This example makes it sufficiently clear 
that grace comes altogether without merit; that no thought 
of grace, much less an effort or a desire for grace, precedes it. 
Even so it was in the case of Paul, While he was yet 
a Saul, what did he do with this (vaunted) highest power of 



LUTHER AND EBASMUS. 57 

free will? Surely he had the best and noblest intentions, • 
when judged by human reason. Now, mark well, through 
what kind of effort did he obtain grace? Not only does he 
not seek grace, but he obtains grace while yet resisting. 
With resi)ect to the Jews, on the other hand, he declares: 
'The Gtentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have 
attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of 
faith. But Israel, which followed after the law of righteous- 
ness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.' (Rom. 9, 
30. 31.) What can any champion of free will mutter against 
this? Without merit, by the grace of God, the Gentiles 
attain to righteousness while yet filled with ungodlin^s and 
all manner of vice, whereas the Jews fail to attain unto 
righteousness whilst striving after the same with most earnest 
endeavor. Is not this Equivalent to saying that the effort 
of free will is vain, and that, while attempting the good, 
the will itself is losing groimd and growing worse ? Nor could 
any one maintain that the Jews had not put forth the very 
best powers of their will. Paul himself ^ bears them record, 
Kom. 10, 2, Hhat they have a zeal of God, but not according 
to knowledge.' Therefore nothing is lacking with the Jews 
which might be attributed to free will ; and yet nothing 
[good] results, but rather the opposite. With the Gtentiles 
nothing is present that is attributed to free will, and yet 
the righteousness of God follows. What have we in this 
most manifest example of these two peoples [Jews and Gen- 
tiles] and in this most clear testimony of Paul other than 
the evidence that grace is bestowed freely upon the un- 
deserving and the most unworthy, and is not obtained by any 
strivings, efforts, or works, however small or great, even of 
the best and most honorable of mankind, even though they 
should seek and follow after righteousness with buriiing zeal V^ 

In the following section Luther marshals powerful argu- 
ments from St. John ; — 

Now let us take up John, who likewise, in many words 
and powerfully, strikes down free will. At the very outset 
he ascribes to free will so great blindness that it cannot even 
see the light of* truth; how much less, then, could it strive 



58 LUTHEB AND ERASMUS. 

after the truth. For he says (John 1, 5) : "The light shineth 
in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not"; and 
shortly after ( w. 10. 11) : *^e was in the world, ... and 
the world knew Him not; He came into His own, and His 
own received Him not." 

What do you suppose he means with "world"? Would 
you exclude from this term any but such as have been re- 
generated by the Holy Ghost? This ax>ostle [John] regularly 
uses the word "world" with a peculiar significance, meaning 
thereby the whole human race. Whatever, then, he says 
regarding the world must apply to the free will, since that 
is the most excellent part of man. !N^ow, then, according to 
this apostle the world does not know the light of truth 
(John 1, 10) ; the world hates Christ and His followers 
(John 15, 19); the world knows not nor sees the Holy 
Ghost (John 14, 17) ; the whole world lieth in wickedness 
(1 John 5, 19) ; all that is in the world is the lust of the 
flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life; love not 
the world (1 John 2, 16. 16) ; ye are of the world (says He) 
(John 8, 25) ; "the world cannot hate you; but Me it hateth 
because I testify of it that the works thereof are evil" 
(John 7, 7). 

All these and similar passages are declarations regarding 
free will as the chief agency of a world lying in the power 
of the devil. For John also speaks of the world by way of 
contrast [to the Holy Ghost] ; hence with "world" is meant 
that part which has not been brought to the Spirit, as He 
says to the Apostles: "I have chosen you out of the world 
and ordained you," etc. (John 15, 19. 16.) Now, then, if 
there were any in the world who with a free will were striving 
after goodness, — as would be the case if free will had any 
power, — then out of respect for such John would properly 
have tempered his speech, so that he would not in his general 
terms involve these also in the many evils which he charges 
against the world. But since he fails to make any such 
restrictions, it is evident that he in every passage regarding 
the "world" also accuses the free will; for whatever the 



LUTUEB AND EBASMUS. 59 

world may do it does by the power of free will, that is, by 
reason and will, which are its chief excellencies. 

Now follows John 1, 12. 13: "But as many as received 
Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God, 
even to them that believe on His name; which were born, 
not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of 
man, but of God." By this clean-cut division he rejects from 
the kingdom of Christ the blood, the will of the flesh, and 
the will of man. ... In this rejection the will of man, or 
the free will, is necessarily included, since it is neither bom 
of God, nor is it fkith. Now, if free will availed aught, it 
would not have behooved John to reject the will of man, nor 
to draw men away from the same, and point them solely to 
faith and regeneration, lest the word of Isaiah (5, 20) be 
made to apply to him: "Woe untg them that call evil good 
and good evil !" However, since he equally rejects blood, the 
will of the flesh and the will of man, it is certain that the 
will of man can do no more toward producing children of 
God than can [human] blood or physical generation. But 
no one doubts that physical birth does not produce children 
of God, as St. Paul says (Rom. 9, 8) : "They which are the 
children of the flesh, these are not the children of God"; 
which he proves by the example of Ishmael and Isaac. 

In deducing an argument against free will from John 
1, 16: "Of His fulness have we all received and grace for 
grace," Luther replies specifically to Erasmus's position that 
man by the effort of his will can, in a measure at least, pre- 
pare himself for the grace of God. And here Luther drives 
home to the consciousness of the champions of free will that 
they are deniers of Christ when they maintain free will. 
For if I by my effort obtain the grace of God, what need have 
I of the grace of Christ in order to receive grace for myself? 
Grace will not suffer beside itself any, even the smallest, 
particle or power of free will. 

Take, further, this word of Christ (John 6, 44) : "No man 
can come to Me except the Father which hath sent Me 
draw Him," — what does it leave for free will? For He 
says it is necessary that a man hear and learn of the Father 



50 LUTHER AND ERASMUS. 

for liberty, they were little interested in the liberty where- 
with Christ has made us free. Luther saw all this. In 
neither party did he find that faith which is the victory that 
overcometh the world. Rather, then, would he fight his 
battles alone. His conscience was bound in God's Word; 
faith in Christ was his impelling motive; trust in God was 
his reliance. God was his refuge and strength. 

An English historian has very correctly observed that 
Luther's "very imperviousness to the intellectual, liberflizing 
tendencies of Humanism made him all the more fit to be 
a trusted leader." (Lindsay.) How differently Luther's 
course would have shaped itself had he been under the 
influence of Erasmus and the Humanists, or had he com- 
promised with them, can be clearly seen in the life and 
reformatory method of Zwingli. The Swiss reformer had 
been under the influence of Humanism from his boyhood. 
In the formative period of his life he was strongly influenced 
by Erasmus. From him he borrowed his rationalistic theorj- 
of the Lord's Supper. This theory, moreover, was merely 
typical of his attitude in general to the Holy Scriptures and 
to all articles of faith; this whole attitude was Erasmian. 
Luther well recognized this in the Marburg Colloquy of 1629 
when he spoke those memorable words to Zwingli and his 
confreres: "You have a different spirit." And that different 
spirit obtains to this day in the Churches that have followed 
the lead of Zwingli (the so-called Reformed group of sects) 
as compared with the Lutheran Church. It is not too much 
to say that, had Luther been influenced by Erasmus and 
other Humanists, or had he, for the sake of peaceful co- 
operation, made concessions to them, the Lutheran Reforma- 
tion of the Church would never have come to pass. 

The relation of Luther to Erasmus, and the controversy 
between the two, calls for extended notice. 

Desiderius Erasmus was born in Rotterdam, probably in 
1467. He was thus about sixteen years older than Luther. 
Eorced into a monastery when a lad, he managed to leave 
it at the age of twenty, retaining a loathing of the monastic 
life. He studied at Cologne and Paris, and later traveled 



LUTHER AND EBASMUS. 51 

considerably, residing for varying periods at Paris, at Lou- 
vain, in England, in Italy, at Basel and at Freiburg im 
Breisgau. He was truly cosmopolitan. In England he met 
and made friends of the Christian Humanists John Colet 
and Thomas More. But he and Luther never met, knowing 
each other only through correspondence and from each other's 
writings. Erasmus never held any official position. He was 
simply a man of letters, and, as the trade of literature was 
not a paying one, he was dependent on pensions from King 
Henry VIII of England and other princes. He was the uni- 
versally acknowledged prince among the Humanists, the 
Voltaire of his day. 

Together with other scholars of his time he bemoaned 
the evil condition of the Church. He decried not only the 
profligate life of the clergy, but equally so the popular con- 
fidence in mere outward religious acts and ceremonies. But 
his conception of a reformation was rather a renovation of 
morals than a purification from unscriptural teaching. 
Nevertheless, when he sent forth his first edition of the New 
Testament, he wrote in the introduction that he wished that 
women as well as men might read the Gospels and the Epistles 
of Paul; that the peasant in the field, the artisan in the 
shop, and the traveler on the highway should employ their 
time by reading from the Bible. He had a firm belief in 
the power of knowledge and enlightenment. He hoped for 
a peaceful reformation; he hated what he called "tumult." 
He could not bear the thought of a religious war. He lacked 
every quality that makes the hero. He feared to commit 
himself on any great question. Any expression of opinion 
was usually so qualified that, if need arose, he might change 
or even deny it. Letters written at the same time, but to 
different parties, express contradictory opinions, and usually 
contain cautionary remarks, such as: "With your usual 
prudence you will show this to no one." His biographers 
confess that it is hopeless to look for truth in his voluminous 
correspondence. "No man knew better how to use 4f' and 
'but' so as to shelter himself from responsibility." 

These traits of character are very illuminating when we 



52 LUTHEB AND ERASMUS. 

consider his relation to Luther. Up to 1520, his attitude 
might be described as one of passive friendliness ; though 
to his credit it must be noted that in 1520 he put forth con- 
siderable effort with the powers of Church and State to 
secure a fair hearing for Luther. But after the Diet at 
Worms he became more and more estranged. He dreaded the 
suspicion of being a "heretic" like Luther, and in manj- 
letters he protested that he had been too busy even to read 
the writings of Luther. When a neutral position seemed no 
longer possible, and he finally decided to take up his pen 
against Luther, he first secured x)ermission from the pope 
to study the writings of the condemned heretic. And several 
years after his controversy with Luther he wrote to Pirk- 
heimer : "How much the authority of the Church avails with 
others I know not, but it is so important to me that I could 
agree with Arians or Pelagians if the Church should approve 
what they taught. Not that the words of Christ are not 
sufficient for me, but it is no wonder that I follow as inter- 
preter the Church, upon the authority of which I believe in 
the canonical Scriptures. Others, perhaps, have more talent 
or more strength than I, but I rest nowhere so safely as in 
the certain judgment of the Church. Of reasons and argu- 
mentations there is no end." 

With this knowledge of his vacillating character and his 
supreme respect for the Church we approach his De Libero 
Arhitrio, 

A succession of events almost forced Erasmus to take up 
his pen against Luther. His patron. King Henry VIII, had 
written an attack upon Luther, on which the Reformer had 
given the king a most stinging reply (1522), showing no 
respect for his position. The king doubtlessly urged Eras- 
mus to help him get revenge. Meanwhile, in 1523, the fiery 
Hutten attacked Erasmus for his indecision (an attack which 
Luther very much deprecated), on which Erasmus replied, 
blaming Luther for disturbing the peace. In a letter to 
Zwingli, to whom he dedicated this reply, Erasmus summed 
up Luther's "errors" to be chiefly these: 1) Designation of 
"good works" as in themselves sinful ; 2) denial of free will ; 



LX7THEB Aim ERASMUS. 53 

3) justification by faith alone. The second of these Erasmus 
chose for the subject of his tract against Luther, partly, at 
least, because on it he could write so as to please Kome, and 
yet not be compelled to recall what he had already written 
against the papacy. Moreover, it was a subject that appealed 
to his speculative mind, and one on which he honestly dif- 
fered from the Wittenberg Professor. 

Luther received advance information of the forthcoming 
Diatribe on the Free Will; and in April, 1624, wrote a kindly 
letter to Erasmus at Basel, beseeching him for the good of 
the cause not to create further divisions and offenses. 

To this letter Erasmus replied courteously, declaring that, 
since Luther felt called to give an account of his faith, he 
must accord the same privilege to others no less zealous for 
the Gospel. Months before this, however, Erasmus had sub- 
mitted a draft of his tract to King Henry, and so in the 
course of 1624 the Diatribe on Free Will was published. 

In the introduction he was at pains to preserve his stand- 
ing with the Church. He has no confidence in the clarity of 
Scriptures; they need an interpreter. As for himself, he 
is ever ready to abide by the interpretation of the Church. 
Eor individuals, like Luther, to appeal independently to 
the Scriptures upsets all certainty. "Moreover," he writes, 
"I take so little pleasure in positive assertions that I would 
readily join the skeptics, were it not for the inviolable au- 
thority of Holy Writ and the decrees of the Church, to which 
I readily subject my reason, whether I am able or not to 
comprehend her directions." Accordingly, we look in vain 
for any original treatment of the question or for any positive 
convictions. "As respects my opinion, I confess that the 
early writers teach much regarding free will, on which I as 
yet have no positive conviction, except that 7 hold that free 
will is possessed of some power." (§ 2.) And so he quotes 
various opinions; but such terms as "It is probable," "It is 
likely," "Whether it be so I know not," creep in again and 
again. To believe in a providential overruling of our lives 
he thinks enough, "without delving into such questions as . . . 
whether our will is active in matters pertaining to our salva- 



52 LUTHEB AI7D ERASMUS. 

consider his relation to Luther. Up to 1520, his attitude 
might be described as one of passive friendliness ; though 
to his credit it must be noted that in 1520 he put forth con- 
siderable effort with the powers of Church and State to 
secure a fair hearing for Luther. But after the Diet at 
Worms he became more and more estranged. He dreaded the 
suspicion of being a "heretic" like Luther, and in many 
letters he protested that he had been too busy even to read 
the writings of Luther. When a neutral position seemed no 
longer possible, and he finally decided to take up his pen 
against Luther, he first secured permission from the pope 
to study the writings of the condemned heretic. And several 
years after his controversy with Luther he wrote to Pirk- 
heimer : "How much the authority of the Church avails with 
others I know not, but it is so important to me that I could 
agree with Arians or Pelagians if the Church should approve 
what they taught. Not that the words of Christ are not 
sufficient for me, but it is no wonder that I follow as inter- 
preter the Church, upon the authority of which I believe in 
the canonical Scriptures. Others, perhaps, have more talent 
or more strength than I, but I rest nowhere so safely as in 
the certain judgment of the Church. Of reasons and argu- 
mentations there is no end." 

With this knowledge of his vacillating character and his 
supreme respect for the Church we approach his De Libero 
Arhitrio. 

A succession of events almost forced Erasmus to take up 
his pen against Luther. His patron. King Henry VIH, had 
written an attack upon Luther, on which the Reformer had 
given the king a most stinging reply (1522), showing no 
respect for his position. The king doubtlessly urged Eras- 
mus to help him get revenge. Meanwhile, in 1523, the fiery 
Hutten attacked Erasmus for his indecision (an attack which 
Luther very much deprecated), on which Erasmus replied, 
blaming Luther for disturbing the peace. In a letter to 
Zwingli, to whom he dedicated this reply, Erasmus summed 
up Luther's "errors" to be chiefly these: 1) Designation of 
"good works" as in themselves sinful; 2) denial of free will; 



LUXHEB A^'D ERASMUS. 55 

Peasant's Revolt, his marriage, and other weighty matters 
to occupy him. However, Luther gave as the real reason for 
the delay his aversion to making reply to so unworthy a tract. 
It was only because he feared that his silence would be mis- 
interpreted that he could bring himself to write a counter- 
tract. But once undertaken, he did the work with customary 
zeal and thoroughness, in this case also paying special 
attention to his Latin and to the form of the composition. 

In December, 1525, Luther published his book under the 
title: On the Unfree Will, which Jonas immediately trans- 
lated into German, with the title : That Free Will Is Nothing, 

In the preface Luther expresses his disappointment that 
Erasmus, to whom he concedes superiority in intellectual 
and rhetorical ability and in the knowledge of the languages, 
should not have made out a better case for himself. He 
asserts 'that Erasmus had brought forward nothing new; 
that his arguments had been demolished in advance by 
Melanchthon in his recently published Doctrinal Theology 
(Loci Communes), He chides the Humanist for being 
"slippery^' in his use of worSs and very shifty in his argu- 
mentation. Thereupon Luther maintains the clarity and 
infallibility of Holy Scriptures, asserting that from them 
a Christian can and should gain full certitude for his faith. 
The Holy Ghost is no skeptic. Without positive truth there 
can be no Christianity. As regards free will, this is not 
a question on which a Christian might well be left in 
ignorance. We must know what ability we have over against 
God, and what not ; else will we not properly venerate, praise^ 
and serve Him. In the following words Luther defines the 
term "free will" : — 

"Now, if we are not ready altogether to drop this term, — 
which would be by far the safer and more Christian thing 
to do, — we should at least teach that the term is used in 
good faith only when a free will is conceded to mai^. not 
with respect to things that are above him, but only with 
respect to things below him; that is, man should know 
that in his temporal possessions he has the power to use, to 
do or leave undone, according to his own free will ; although 



56 LUTHEB AND EBASMUS. 

even this is controlled by God's free will, as it pleases Him. 
But over against God, or in matters pertaining to salvation 
or damnation, man has no free will, but is bound, subjected 
as a servant to the free will of God ^r to the will of the 
devil." 

Thereupon Luther proceeds to take up for discussion each 
point of the Diatribe. He makes reply to each opinion sub- 
mitted by Erasmus, copiously quoting Scripture to maintain 
his own position. Everywhere Luther speaks with positive 
conviction. As a result of the fall into sin, man's whole 
nature is depraved ; the will is not free, but bound, a slave to 
Satan; no man can of himself, of his own will, accomplish, 
or even desire; aught that is good in God's sight. Every 
impulse toward that which is good must emanate from God. 
When man turns from sin to righteousness ; when he accepts 
the salvation in Christ; when he believes and begins to do 
''good works": all this is the result of God's calling and 
drawing, which itself is consequent upon Gt)d's eternal decree 
of grace in predestination. All this is, of course, offensive 
to human pride and far above human reason (Ps. 73, 22: 
''So foolish was I and ignorant; I was as a beast before 
Thee") ; but all this is the clear teaching of God's Word, and 
must therefore be simply believed. All this is also* very 
comforting to the believer, who thus knows his salvation de- 
pendent not upon his own fickle will, but upon the un- 
ichanging will and grace of God. 

"Take the example," he says, "in Kom. 10, 20, adduced 
from Isaiah: 'I was found of them that sought Me not; 
T was made manifest unto* them that asked not after Me.' 
This he says of the heathen, that unto them it had been 
given to hear and to know Christ, although previously they 
could not have had so much as a thought of Christ, much 
less seek Him or with the powers of free will to pret)are 
themselves for Him. This example makes it sufficiently clear 
that grace comes altogether without merit; that no thought 
of grace, much less an effort or a desire for grace, precedes it. 
Even so it was in the case of Paul. While he was yet 
a Saul, what did he do with this (vaunted) highest power of 



LUTHER AXD ERASMUS. 57 

free will? Surely he had the best and noblest intentions, 
when judged by human reason. Now, mark well, through 
what kind of effort did he obtain grace? Not only does he 
not seek grace, but he obtains grace while yet resisting. 
With respect to the Jews, on the other hand, he declares: 
'The Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have 
attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of 
faith. But Israel, which followed after the law of righteous- 
ness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.' (Rom. 9, 
30. 31.) What can any champion of free will mutter against 
this? Without merit, by the grace of God, the Gtentiles 
attain to righteousness while yet filled with ungodliness and 
all manner of vice, whereas the Jews fail to attain unto 
righteousness whilst striving after the same with most earnest 
endeavor. Is not this Equivalent to saying that the effort 
of free will is vain, and that, while attempting the good, 
the will itself 48 losing ground and growing worse ? Nor could 
any one maintain that the Jews had not put forth the very 
best powers of their will. Paul himself^ bears them record, 
Kom. 10, 2, 'that they have a zeal of God, but not according 
to knowledge.' Therefore nothing is lacking with the Jews 
which might be attributed to free will; and yet nothing 
[good] results, but rather the opposite. With the Gtentiles 
nothing is present that is attributed to free will, and yet 
the righteousness of God follows. What have we in this 
most manifest example of these two peoples [Jews and Gen- 
tiles] and in this most clear testimony of Paul other than 
the evidence that grace is bestowed freely upon the un- 
deserving and the most unworthy, and is not obtained by any 
strivings, efforts, or works, however small or great, even of 
the best and most honorable of mankind, even though they 
should seek and follow after righteousness with burning zeal ?" 

In the following section Luther marshals powerful argu- 
ments from St. John : — 

Now let us take up John, who likewise, in many words 
and powerfully, strikes down free will. At the very outset 
he ascribes to free will so great blindness that it cannot even 
see the light of* truth; how much less, then, could it strive 



68 LUTHEB AND JUSTIFICATION. 

means of grace, through which the Holy Spirit is conferred. 
Yet are they not charms that work in a magical manner. 
Holy Baptism is for the remission of sins. Yet it is not the 
water that does the work, but the word of God, which is in 
and with the water, and faith, which trusts such word of God 
in the water. The Holy Communion is for the remission 
of sins. Yet it is not the eating and drinking that does the 
work, for he is truly worthy and well prepared who has faith 
in these words, "Given and shed for you for the remission 
of sins." For the words, "For you," require all hearts to 
believe. 

If the Gospel is the divine object and also the divine 
cause of faith, then this Gospel has a unique dignity and 
authority, which nothing else can rival. Bound by the 
authority of God's Word, we are bound by nothing else. 
If the Son has made us free, we will not again be entangled 
with the yoke of bondage. (John 8, 36; Gal. 5, 1.) 

This liberty is not an unbridled license or a chaotic 
anarchy, it is a liberty in Christ: one is your Master, even 
Christ, and all ye are brethren. (Matt. 23, 8.) Our liberty 
is regulated by Christ, otherwise we bow to no authority. 

In this Protestant freedom we are free from the yoke 
of the Roman tradition, which the papists place on a level 
with the fiible as an independent source of knowledge and 
as of equal binding force and authority. We are, further- 
more, free from the authority of Rationalism, which holds 
human reason the source and norm of spiritual knowledge. 
We are, finally, free from the authority of Mystipism, which 
places an inner light alongside of Scripture or even above 
Scripture. 

2. The Effect of Faith. 

If God loved us to save us, we love God for having saved 
us, — we love Him because He first loved us. (1 John 4, 19.) 

The love of God was not an idle sentiment, it sacrificed 
His only-begotten Son for us; and our love of God is not 
sentimental moonshine, the love of Christ constraineth us. 
(2 Cor. 5, 14.) Christ is our righteousness, also He is our 
sanctification. (1 Cor. 1, 30.) Justifying faith is the potent 



LUTHEB AND JUSTIFICATION. 69 

principle of holiness. If any man is in Christ, he is a new 
creature. (2 Cor. 5, 14; Kom. 5, 5.) Faith worketh by- 
love. (Gal. 6, 6. 22 — 25.) Examine yourselves whether ye 
be in the faith. (2 Cor. 13, 5; Gal. 6, 4.) It is the Apostle 
of Faith who has sung the divinest Hymn of Love, in 
1 Cor. 13. 

Since our good works flow from the fountain of our love 
of God, since they are the fruits of our faith, they cannot 
be the ground of our justification ; they do not precede justi- 
fying faith, but follow after the same. Our good works are 
not merits to be rewarded, not service to be paid for, but 
they are the tokens of thanks for mercies received. 

This truth majestically brushes aside the whole jungle of 
. papal good works of monks and nuns, and celibacy, and 
fastings, and flagellations, and vows, and pilgrimagfes, and 
rosaries, and penances, and satisfactions, and sacriflces, and 
the countless host of saints, male and female, and their 
glory and intercession, and we see no man but Jesus only. 

From what has been said there comes into view the 
relation between the Law and the Gospel. Though both 
are revelations of God, their functions differ fundamentally. 
The Law reveals God's holiness, and by contrast man's sin- 
fulness and condemnation. The Gospel reveals God's grace 
and man's salvation through the atonement of Jesus Christ. 
By the Law is the knowledge of sin; by the Gospel is the 
f orgivenes of sin. 

The Law is a guide-post, pointing out the road of holiness ; 
but it can supply no life and strength to walk the path of 
holiness. The Gospel gives the spiritual life and spiritual 
strength to travel the road to heaven. 

The atoning work of Christ offered in the Gospel and 
received by faith unites me to Christ, the Head, and makes 
me a living member of His body, the Church. And so the 
Church is the communion of saints. The saints have com- 
munion with Christ, and through Christ with one another. 
The Church is not Christ's vicar on earth, whom I must 
obey in order to become a member of the outward organization 
and thus a member of Christ, but the Church is Christ's 



70 LUTHEB AND JUSTIFICATION. 

servant, which ministers the Gospel to me, and unites me 
to Christ, and thus makes me a member of the Church. 
Christ and faith in Christ is the basis of my church-member- 
ship. The Church does not make me a member of Christ, 
but Christ makes me a member of the Church. 

Where is this Church, and by what marks can I know it? 
The Gospel creates faith; faith makes the Christian; the 
Christians make the Church. The Church, then, is where 
the Gospel and the Sacraments are in use, and by the use 
of the Gospel and the Sacraments I recognize the Church 
with unerring certainty; and there is where I belong. The 
people using the Gospel and the Sacraments form the con- 
gregation, or the visible Church. 

In this visible congregation the Word of God rules with 
divine authority. Human rules may be made and altered 
from time to time, that everything may be done decently and 
in order, but human rules may not be enforced as necessary 
to salvation. 

From justification by faith it is an easy step to the uni- 
versal priesthood of all believers. The Old Testament dis- 
tinction between priest and people, clergymen and laymen, 
is at an end. Christ, our High Priest, has made all Chris- 
tians priests unto God. All Christians are God's clergy, 
and so there is no special clerical order in the Church. The 
ministry is an office, not an order, much less a threefold 
order of bishops, priests, and deacons. 

It follows that the Office of the Keys is not given to the 
hierarchy, which does not exist, but to all Christians, who 
make up the Church. These Christians ask some one to 
perform the functions of the ministry for them, in their 
stead, for God's sake. And so the Church is a government 
of the people, by the people, and for the people, and all 
Christians are the people. 

And so we are the people to have the Bible and to spread 
the Bible; we are the people to read the Bible and school 
every boy and girl to read the Bible; we are the people to 
interpret the Bible, and thus separate Church and State, 
and permit neither priest nor politician to dictate our re- 



LXTTHEB AND JUSTIFICATION. 71 

ligion or our politics, and thus maintain our civil and 
religious liberty. 

Was Luther's teaching "novel," "original with him"? 
Principal Forsyth says: "Luther, I reiterate, rediscovered 
Paul and the New Testament. He gave back to Christianity 
the Gospel, and he restored Christianity to religion. . . . 
The issue which is raised concerns the essential nature of 
Christianity." (Rome, Reform, and Reaction,) Lyman 
Abbott declares : "Lutheranism was a revival of Paulinism." 
(Life of Paul, p. 327.) Renan says Paul has "been for three 
hundred years, thanks to Protestantism, the Christian doctor 
pa7' excellence" D. S. Muzzey says "the theologians ,succeed 
in identifying St. Paul with Lutheranism." 

III. The Effect. 

1. On the Individual, 

John Henry Newman, the famous Anglican and later 
Roman cardinal, says it was Luther's "wish to extirpate all 
notions of human merit ; next, to give peace and satisfaction 
to the troubled conscience." 

Certainly a noble wish. Did Luther succeed? Let New- 
man say: "Luther's view of the Gospel covenant met both 
the alleged evils against which it was provided. For if 
Christ has obeyed the Law instead of us, it follows that 
every believer has at once a perfect righteousness, yet not 
his own. That it is not his own precludes all boasting; that 
it is perfect precludes all anxiety. The conscience is unladen, 
without becoming puffed up." (Led. on Justif., p. 26.) 

Well put, Mr. Newman, and quite true. St. Paul said so 
long ago : "Being justified by faith, we have peace with God 
through our Lord Jesus Christ, . . . and rejoice in hope of 
the glory of God." (Rom. 5, 1. 2.) 

2, On the Church. 

Mr. Newman says: "Luther found in the Church great 
corruptions countenanced by its highest authorities; he 
felt them." 

History tells us how quite unspeakable were these cor- 



72 LUTHEB AND JUSTIFICATION. 

ruptions in teaching and living. The whole world tried, and 
tried again, and yet again, at the councils of Pisa, and Con- 
stance, and Basel, and the Lateran, to reform the Church, 
and failed signally and dismally. Cardinal Bellarmine says : 
"Religion was almost dead.*' Von Doellinger says: "The 
last hope of a reformation of the Church was carried to the 
grave." 

Where all the world, the great in Church and State, had 
failed for centuries, Luther succeeded almost instantly. 
How? Mr, Newman says: "He adopted a doctrine original, 
specious, fascinating, persuasive, powerful against Rome, 
and wonderfully adapted, as if prophetically, to the genius 
of the times which were to follow. He found Christians in 
bondage to their works and observances; he released them by 
his doctrine of faith." (p. 386.) 

Mr. Newman was bitterly hostile to Luther's "justifica- 
tion," and left the Anglican Church for the Roman, and 
became a cardinal. 

3. On the World in Oeneral. 

"Luther was one of the greatest personalities in the history 
of the human race; he possessed a remarkable and fasci- 
nating individuality, and a mind so masterful as to dominate 
those about him and to impress its stamp upon the subsequent 
political and religious history of the world." (Monsignor 
Jos. H. McMahon in Catholic Library Ass'n Lect. Course 
1913_4 in Dehnonico's, N. Y. City.) 

"Luther has been the restorer of liberty in modem times.'* 
(Michelet, French Catholic writer.) 

"That heroic and pregnant No ! bore within it the liberties 
of the world." (Francois Auguste Marie Mignet.) 

"Its beneficial influence has been felt in every branch of 
learning, in every department of science, and in every insti- 
tution of civil liberty." (Thomas Home, Bampton Lee- 
tures, 1828.) 

"Luther has done more to change the history of the 
world than any other man since St. Paul." (Dr. Francis 
Clark, in Christian Endeavor World,) 



LUTHEB AND JUSTIFICATION. 73 

4. On America in Particular. 

"The principle of justification by faith alone brought 
with it the freedom of individual thought and conscience 
against authority." (Bancroft, I, p. 178.) 

"Free and representative government is the logical con- 
sequence of Protestant Christianity." (Laveleye's Prot. and 
Oath.; Introduction by Gladstone.) 

"The republic of America is a corollary of the Reforma- 
tion." (Charles Frangois Dominique de Villers.) 

"The inalienable rights of an American citizen are nothing 
but the Protestant idea of the general priesthood of all 
believers applied to the civil sphere, or developed into the 
corresponding idea of the general kingship of free men." 
(Philip Schaff, Creeds, p. 219.) 

"The Reformation of Luther . . . introduced the principle 
of civil liberty . . . into the wilderness of North America." 
(Daniel Webster at Bunker Hill, June 17, 1843.) 

"The free millions of the United States may well rise up 
and do Luther honor by cherishing his example, pondering 
his history, and maintaining his creed." (Bishop Thorold, of 
Rochester, England; Phila. Press, Nov. 10, 1883.) 

"Every man in Western Europe and in America is leading 
a different life to-day from what he would have been, had 
Martin Luther not lived." (Dr. Preserved Smith; also 
Froude, also Charles Dudley Warner.) 

"Our civil liberty is the result of the open Bible, which 
Luther gave us." (Henry Ward Beeeher.) 

"Look around and see . . . Luther's . . . latest fruits in the 
greatness of this free republic." (Wm. M. Taylor, LL. D., 
Broadway Tabernacle, N. Y. City.) 

"Martin Luther . . . the instrument of God in giving . . . 
all that we Americans now enjoy, and all that we rejoice in 
being." (The Hon. Robert C. Winthrop, Mass, Hist. 8oc.) 

"To Martin Luther, above all men, we Anglo-Americans 
are indebted for national independence and mental freedom." 
(Frederic Hedge, of Harvard.) 

"America has been the greatest beneficiary of that noble 



; 



/ 



74 LUTHER AT MARBUBG. 

teaching" (Luther's). (Pres. Eliot, of Harvard, May 9, 1913, 
N. Y. City.) 

"Our Constitution still reads: 'Congress shall make no 
law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting 
the free exercise thereof.' For this we must thank the Refor- 
mation." (The Rev. Prof. Francis Pieper, D. D., Pres. Con- 
cordia Theol. Sem., St. Louis.) 



Luther at Marburg. 

Prof. R. D. Biedermann, Concordia Seminary, Springfield, 111. 

"Deus vos impleat odio papae" (God fill you with hatred 
towards the pope), said Martin Luther to his friends in re- 
ferring to the perniciousness of Roman doctrines and to 
the abomination of the hierarchic practises. Protestants in 
general approve of this famous adm,onition of Luther in 
regard to the papacy. Praise for Luther's parting words to 
Zwingli at Marburg, "Yours is a different spirit from ours," 
is not so general. Indeed, Luther's attitude towards the 
Zwingli ans at the conclusion of the conference at Marburg 
has met with unanimous condemnation on the part of all 
Protestants of the unionistic type. 

Says James Taft Hatfield in The Dial (1911, p. 528) : 
"His [Luther's] crude superstition is very unlovely; so is 
his narrow intolerance of religious variation; more par- 
ticularly his pig-headed ugliness towards the good Zwingli." 

Bunsen represents the occurrences at Marburg as being 
"the deepest tragedy of Luther's life and of the history of 
Protestantism" — by fault of Luther. (Acme Library of 
Standard Biography, 1880, p. 39.) 

Arthur jA. McGiffert has this to say: "The most notable 
example of Luther's intolerance was his attitude toward the 
famous Swiss reformer, Ulrich Zwingli. ... In reading the 
reports of the Marburg Colloquy, we are inevitably reminded 
of the great Leipsic debate of eleven years before. As Eck 
then insisted upon blind and unquestioning submission to 
the authority of the Church, Luther now insisted upon the 



LUTHER AT MABBUB6. 75 

same kind of submission to the authority of the Bible/' 
(Articles in Centv/ry, 1911; also published in book form, 
Martin Luther, the Man and His Work, The Century Co., 
1911.) 

True, at Marburg Luther once more "insisted upon blind 
and unquestioning submission to the Bible." At Marburg 
Luther once more applied the formal principle of the Refor- 
mation — Sola Scriptura, Scripture alone. At Marburg 
Zwingli and his adherents once more revealed that "spirit 
so different" from Luther's, that rationalistic treatment of 
God's Holy Writ, the minimizing of doctrinal differences for 
the purpose of external union. 

For years that "different spirit" of Zwingli and other 
"Sarrarnentarians" had been in evidence. For years Luther 
and his colleagues had fought this "different spirit." 

Huldricus Zwinglius, of Zurich, Switzerland, like others 
of his age, was indebted to the writings of Martin Luther 
for the knowledge that the pope was not the vicar of Christ 
to the Church nor its lawgiver. But Zwinglius, "Reformator 
et Pastor Ecclesiae Tigurinae," as he signed himself, had 
not, like Luther, passed through great inward struggles, was 
not centered in the comforting doctrine of justification by 
grace, did not seek every means to enrich sinners with the 
Gospel-treasure of forgiveness of sins and the certainty 
thereof. More of a legislator than a pastor, Zwingli aimed 
at the improvement of community life, the reconstruction 
of public morals. Political reformation was predominant 
in the mind of Zwinglius. To him the Church was not the 
spiritual body, nourished by the spiritual means of the 
Word and the Sacraments, but a social institution, entrusted 
with the responsibility of suggesting laws for the moral 
elevation of the citizenship. Zwingli mixed State and 
Church as much as any Romanist might do, substituting 
Protestantism, of course, for Romanism in the process of 
amalgamation. Zwingli also worshiped the beautiful in 
letters and art, adored mind in man, was a thorough ration- 
alist, and had no use for an objective Word of Ood to which 
subjective opinions must be subordinated. Where there was 



76 LUTHEB AT MABBUBO. 

a collision between a Bible-passage and Human reasoning, 
a textual explanation must be found which does not outrage, 
but rather satisfy the human mind. 

Following the "Fernt^n/^rinzip" (principle of reason) 
instead of the "/S^c^rif^rinzip" (principle of the Bible), it 
was only natural that Zwingli drifted away from Luther and 
soon became his opponent, especially in the doctrine of the 
Eucharist, the Lord's Supper. In this respect Zwingli fol- 
lowed Bodenstein, with some variation of interpretation. 

Andreas Bodenstein, of Carlstadt, in Franconia, generally 
called Carlstadtius, at one time a colaborer of Luther at 
the University of Wittenberg, had since 1521 done incal- 
culable harm to the work of the Reformation through his 
riotous, fanatic teaching. His operations became even more 
destructive to the Evangelical Church when he came to the 
front with his false interpretation of the words of the 
Sacrament. 

According to Carlstadt, Christ, when uttering the word 
xovxof this, pointed to His visible body, implying: You see 
My body before you, which I give for you; in commemoration 
thereof partake of bread and wine. Thus Carlstadt, with one 
stroke, removed from the words of the Sacrament, first, the 
wonderful truth that Christ gives to the partaker of the 
consecrated bread and wine His body and blood; secondly, 
the consoling message that sins are forgiven to the com- 
municant; thirdly, the comforting assurance that the body 
and blood of Christ received with the bread and wine are 
a token, a seal of the words of forgiveness. 

Although he took sides with Carlstadt against Luther, 
Zwingli did not emasculate the text in the same fashion. 
To Zwingli, the linguist, it was quite plain that tovto, this, 
must refer to the bread and the wine distributed by Christ 
to the individual communicants. But, said Zwingli, the 
word saxi, is, in the institution means signifies (hedeutet). 
Take, eat; this bread signifies My body, which is given for 
you. Take, drink; this wine signifies My blood, which is 
shed for you. This treatment of the plain, sublime words 
of our Master was first published in Zwingli's Commentarius 



LUTHER AT MABBUBG. 77 

de vera et falsa religione, 1525. The effect of Zwingli's 
interpretation of Chri'st's words was the same as in Carl- 
stadt's maltreatment of the same — a denatured Sacrament, 
robbed of its special import and profit to the penitent com- 
municant. 

As to Luther's simple acceptance of the first and direct 
meaning of Christ's words, Zwingli wrote: "Est opinio non 
solum rustica, sed etiam impia et frivola," an opinion which 
is not only rustic (baeurisch, farmer-like), but also impious 
and frivolous. (Ketter to Matth. Alber, pastor at Reutlingen.) 

Of one mind with both Carlstadt and Zwingli was the 
latter's dear friend and companion in Switzerland, Johannes 
Oecolampadius (Johann Hausschein). For his religious 
knowledge Oecolampadius was also indebted to Luther. What 
is more, as late as 1521 he had fought at Luther's side for 
the real presence of the body and blood of Christ in the 
Sacrament. Afterwards he shared Zwingli's position. But 
to reach that ground he must blaze a path of his own in the 
treatment of Christ's institutional words. Why deprive the 
word iaii, is, of its literal meaning when you get the same 
results by a figurative explanation of the words acdjua, body, 
and al/m, blood ? "Body" means "sign of My body" ; *^lood" 
means ''sign, emhlem, of My blood." 

This ingenious, but audacious circumvention of the plain, 
unquestionable promise of Christ to give the very body and 
blood which were sacrificed for us was publicly pronounced 
by Oecolampadius in his book, De genuina verborum Domini: 
Hoc est corpus meum, expositione, 1525. 

The year 1525 produced another colleague of Carlstadt, 
Zwingli, and Oecolampadius by the name of Caspar Schwenk- 
feld von Ossigk. A mystic, depending not on the words of 
Scripture, — to do so he termed "Buchstabendienst," slavery 
to the letter, — Schwenkf eld claimed to know by special 
revelation that tovto, this, was the predicate of the disputed 
sentence ; the words must be reversed, as it were : My body is 
this, namely, the true bread for the soul; My blood is this, 
namely, the true potion for the soul. 

Valentin Krautwald, of Silesia, indorsed this Schwenk- 



78 LUTHEB AT MARBUB6. 

feldian treatment of the institutional words. One Petrus 
Flonis, of Cologne, succeeded in finding still another way 
of juggling the sacred words of Christ. 

Luther cast them all "into one and the same pot." He 
perceived in each and every one of the Sacramentarians the 
"identical puffed-up, carnal mind which twists about and 
struggles in the attempt to avoid obeying the Word of Grod. 
(St. Louis ed. XVIEI, 1541.) As to himself, the very dis- 
union of his opponents in the exegesis of the text confirmed 
him in his Christian spirit of clinging to the text as the 
only way of knowing the truth (John 8, 31. 32). "I am hedged 
in, I cannot escape: the text, all too powerful, is there, and 
does not suffer itself to be torn from one's mind." (Erl. 
53, 274.) 

In 1524, Luther wrote his "Letter to the Christians at 
Strassburg," where Bucer and Capito leaned towards Carl- 
stadt. This was followed in 1525 by the treatise "Against the 
Heavenly Prophets concerning Emblems and the Sacrament." 

Being still "busy with Erasmus," Luther left Zwingli, 
Oecolampadius, and Schwenkfeld to his colaborers in the 
work of the Lord. (Letter to Nic. Hausmann at Zwickau. 
St. L. ed., XXI a, 792.) Thus Johann Bugenhagen — Luther 
generally calls him Pomeranus — writes against Zwingli in 
defense of a literal acceptance of Christ's words in the 
Sacrament. Oecolampadius rushes to the aid of his friend 
Zwingli. The Swabian clergymen, Johann Brenz and Erhard 
Schnepf, answer in the name of fourteen other pastors by 
the "Syngramma Suevicum," ably defending Luther's doc- 
trine on the Eucharist. Oecolampadius, in 1526, meets the 
"Syngramma" by an "Antisyngramma." — Another list of 
Lutheran theologians (Bilibald Pirkheimer, Theobald Ger- 
lacher, Urbanus Bhegius, and others) enter the army of 
brave defenders of the right doctrine. — A new feature enters 
into the conflict. Capito and Bucer, of Strassburg, attempt 
the role of peacemakers by minimizing the doctrinal dif- 
ference, asking Lutherans and Zwinglians to fraternize re- 
gardless of remaining discrepancies. 

At last the mighty Luther again takes up the battle 



LUTHEB AT MABBUBO. 79 

against the whole field of Sacramentarians. In 1526, appeared 
his "Sermon on the Body and Blood of Christ against the 
Fanatics." This was followed in April, 1527, by the tre- 
mendously powerful treatise "That These Words: *This Is 
My Body,' Still Stand Unshaken." After a violent illness, 
during which his life was despaired of, Luther resumed labor 
on his book, "Dr. Martin Luther's Confession concerning 
Christ's Supper," and published it in the early part of 1528. 
This book is remarkable for its clearness, depth, and force. 

Thus did the controversy rage up to 1529, the year of 
the Marburg Conference. 

It is a historical misrepresentation, however, to treat this 
conference as the culmination of a desire on the part of the 
theologians to bury their differences. The initiative was 
taken by the Landgrave Philip of Hesse. He wished to 
bring about doctrinal union among the Protestants, in order 
that they might amalgamate and form a solid, politico- 
military body against the aggressive Romanists. For not 
only did Emperor Charles V unite his power with the 
influence of the pope to carry out the Edict of Worms and 
crush Lutheranism, the papal nuncio Campeggi had also 
effected a league between Archduke Ferdinand, the Duke of 
Bavaria, the Archbishop of Salzburg, and a majority of 
bishops in the southeastern part of Germany. The avowed 
purpose of this Catholic federation was the protection of 
"the old faith" and the strict enforcement of the Edict of 
Worms. In their realm no books of Luther should be printed, 
no student from their territory should be allowed to attend 
the University of Wittenberg. The convention at Ratisbon 
had the fullest cooperation of Emperor Charles V in its 
hostile measures toward Lutheranism. In those days 
Charles V, obedient servant of the pope, sent repeated 
messages from Spain to all princes and bishops of Germany, 
demanding that the Lutheran heresy be crushed. 

It was then that Landgrave Philip of Hesse, Elector John 
of Saxony, and Margrave George of Brandenburg felt con- 
strained to form a Protestant League to defend the Evan- 
gelical faith by arms. Luther, for various reasons, did not 



80 LUTHEB AT MABBUBG. 

indorse this course, partly, because carnal weapons should 
not be used to protect the spiritual kingdom of Christ; 
partly, because arms should not be carried against the 
emperor, their lawful ruler; finally, because those that were 
to be united into one army were not of one faith. 

How to eliminate the doctrinal differences among the 
Protestants became a burning question, not so much from 
a religious as from a politico-military point of view. There- 
fore Landgrave Philip of Hesse sent invitations to the most 
prominent Lutheran and Reformed theologians to meet him 
at Marhurg. 

The invitations were accepted with alacrity by Zwingli, 
Oecolampadius, Bucer, and Caspar Hedio; with reluctance 
by the Lutheran theologians. Neither Luther nor Melanch- 
thon, Osiander nor Brenz, were favorably impressed with 
the motives of Philip. Nor did they have any new testimony 
to offer to the Sacramentarians beyond what had been written 
in public for ten years. The Lutheran theologians also appre- 
hended in advance the malignant judgment which would arise 
among their adversaries if the conference — as it was bound 
to do — ended in discord. Through the "impetuous impor- 
tuning" of the landgrave, Luther and Melanchthon "finally 
were compelled to promise" that they would attend the con- 
ference. (Comp. Luther's letter to Johann Brismann at Kiga. 
St. L. ed. XXI a, 1339.) Their letter of acceptance to the 
margrave concludes : "May the Father of all mercy and unity 
grant His Holy Spirit in order that we do not meet in vain, 
but rather with benefit, and in no wise with evil results." 
(St. L. ed. XXI a, 1326. Comp. XXI a, 1935. 1937 ff.) 

After they had accepted the invitation, however, both 
Luther and Melanchthon did their utmost to win the Zwing- 
lians, and thus to prevent the very failure which they 
predicted. 

By Friday, October 1, 1529, the chief representatives of 
both parties had reached Marburg, and were received by 
the landgrave with great kindness. At first he had placed 
his guests in comfortable quarters of the city. He then 
changed his mind and made them all his personal, intimate 



LUTHEB AT MABBUBG. 81 

guests at his castle. These were Zwingli, Oecolampadius, 
Bucer, Hedio, and the laymen Jacob Sturm, Ulrich Funk, 
and Rudolf Frey, all influential citizens of their respective 
communities; then Luther, Melanchthon, Johann Brenz, 
Justus Jonas, Andreas Osiander, Stephan Agricola, Caspar 
Cruciger, Friedrich Myconius, Justus Menius, and the lay- 
man Eberhard von der Tann. The conference attracted many 
visitors to Marburg from Cologne, Strassburg, Basel, and 
other places. Very few besides those already mentioned were 
able to gain access to the interior chamber, which adjoined 
the office of the landgrave. Luther and Melanchthon, Zwingli 
and Oecolampadius, were seated at a table, in front of which 
sat the landgrave and his attendants. 

No agreement having been reached in a private discussion 
held on the previous day, the debate was now resumed before 
the small assembly and the landgrave. As to the tenor of the 
debate, a witness wrote later on : "One might have considered 
Luther and Zwingli brethren instead of opponents. Once 
only did Luther show some excitement, when Zwingli pro- 
vokingly remarked that the passage in John 6: *The flesh 
profiteth nothing,' must ^break Luther's neck.' As to argu- 
ments, the debate was at no time carried beyond what had 
been laid down in the public writings of both parts." 

For almost two days Oecolampadius emphasized his old 
argument: that Christ has a true body, which is in heaven; 
no true body could be at many places at the same time. 
He also spent much time with the sixth chapter of John, 
concerning the spiritual eating and drinking of the Lord's 
body and blood, attempting to identify the same with the 
eating and drinking in the Sacrament. 

The Zwinglians tortured John 6, 63 : "The flesh profiteth 
nothing," as an argument against the real presence of 
Christ's body and blood in the Sacrament. It amounted 
to blasphemy when they referred these words of Christ to 
the flesh of Jesus; for the context plainly shows that man's 
flesh is meant, which profits nothing in spiritual matters. 

Luther made it very plain that there was no connection, 
much less a contradiction, between John 6, 63 and the words 

Four Hundred Years. 6 



82 LUTHER AT MABBUBO. 

of the Sacrament. And pointing to the text, "This is My 
body," which he had written on the table before him, Luther 
explained: "Leave it to the almighty God-man Christ how 
He effects His presence with the sacramental bread and wine 
at so many places and at the same time. What He promises 
He can and will do, for He is truthful. There are some 
human attributes wherein Christ did not make Himself like 
unto man ; for instance, Christ had no wife. There are other 
attributes wherein He far surpasses all men, powers which 
no man can have in common with Christ, for instance, that 
His exalted true human nature takes part in the omni- 
presence of the divine nature." 

On Sunday, May 3, Luther preached the early morning 
sermon. He did not make a single reference to the pending 
controversy, but preached about forgiveness of sins, justi- 
fication by faith (the "MaterialpTinzip^' of the Reformation). 
To ignore all discord at that hour showed great tact and 
gentleness on the part of Luther. Making justification by 
faith his theme, he also clearly revealed what article of the 
Christian faith was paramount in his heart and in his 
theology. 

The debate was resumed after service, and carried into 
the afternoon, yea, into eventide. As all hopes of agreement 
vanished, Zwingli asked with tears thai they should never- 
theless he accepted as hreihren in the faith. It was then 
that Luther refused the proffered hand of fellowship, sup- 
porting his action by the sentence, now famous: "Yours is 
a different spirit from ours" And Melanchthon heartily 
agreed with Luther in such refusal of a union without unity. 
He wrote to John Agricola: "They pleaded intensely that 
they should be called brethren by us. Behold the incon- 
sistency I They condemn us, and yet desire to be considered 
our brethren. To this we did not care to consent." (St. L. ed. 
XVII, 1956.) 

Still some agreement was reached. It may be surmised 
from a letter of Luther to the same Agricola: "But we did 
extend to them the hand of peace and love, that acrimonious 
articles and words should be omitted, and that every one 



LUTHEB AT MABBUBG. 83 

should teach his opinion without hostile attacks, not, however, 
without proof and disproof (nicht ohne Verteidigung und 
Widerlegung). Thus we parted." 

Before they parted, Luther formulated articles to show 
how far, after all, they had come to an agreement in other 
respects, and just where the difference remained in the doc- 
trine of the Eucharist. The landgrave had been the most 
earnest listener at all sessions. He is said to have remarked 
in public, "Now will I rather believe the plain words of 
Christ than the clever thoughts of men." (St. L. ed. XVII, 
1950.) It was the landgrave who prevailed upon Luther to 
formulate those final articles. There were fifteen in all (not 
only fourteen; comp. St. L. ed. XVII, 1943), and they were 
signed by Martin Luther, Philippus Melanchthon, Justus 
Jonas, Andreas Osiander, Johannes Brentius, Stephanus 
Agricola, Johannes Oecolampadius, Ulricus Zwinglius, Mar- 
tin Bucerus, Caspar Hedio. 

At this time hoth Luther and Melanchthon were more 
hopeful regarding the Swiss theologians than at any pre- 
viou>s time. 

Luther wrote to John Agricola: "In short, they are un- 
trained people and inexperienced in debate. Though aware 
that their sayings proved nothing, they would nevertheless 
not give in as to this one article; and this (as we are con- 
vinced) more from fear and shame than from malice. In 
all other points they yielded, as you will see from the placard 
sent forth." (St. L. ed. XVII, 1955.) 

To Wenceslaus Link in Nuremberg Luther wrote: "In 
short, these people do not appear to be malicious; they have 
fallen into this notion by error and accident, and would 
gladly be extricated therefrom, if it could be done." (XVII, 
1958.) 

Melanchthon to John Agricola: "I am perfectly con- 
vinced that if the matter had not yet gone so far (wenn die 
Sache noch nicht eingebrockt waere), they would not enact 
such a great tragedy." (XVII, 1956.) 

From the pulpit at Wittenberg Luther gave information 
to the congregation about the Marburg Conference: "We 



84 LUTHEB AT MABBUBO. 

have suffered no harm on the way; therein God has heard 
your prayers, for which you should thank Him. Furthermore, 
our opponents have shown themselves very friendly and polite, 
more so than we anticipated. They admit tliat one receives 
faith and consolation in the Sacrament, but that the very 
body and blood should truly be there they cannot believe 
as yet. And this much we felt that they would have given 
in if the matter rested entirely with themselves. Since they, 
however, had a definite order from their people, they could 
not back down. They do not deny that the true body and 
blood of Christ are present, which, therefore, sounds as 
though they were with us. They admit that those attending 
the Supper truly partake of the body and blood of Christ, 
but spiritually only, so as to have Christ in the heart. Bodily 
eating they will not admit; that we have left to their 
conscience. Therefore the matter is very hopeful. I do not 
say that there exists a fraternal union, but a benevolent 
friendly harmony, so they will seek from us in a friendly 
manner what they lack, and we, on the other hand, be of 
service to them. If you will all pray diligently, the friendly 
harmony may ripen into a fraternal union," (Junius, Com, 
Seek., Vol. 2, p. 244.) 

All these quotations certainly breathe an admirable spirit 
of mildness, patience, and charity on Luther's part. The 
critics of Luther at Marburg — several of whom we have 
quoted at the outset — have not sought, much less considered, 
all the material which has a bearing on the subject. 

At the same time these quotations show that Luther made 
no compromise with error on any terms. Therein his spirit 
stands in clear contrast to that of Zwingli and his adherents, 
especially the wabbling "peacemakers from Strassburg, 
Capito and Bucer." In refusing church-fellowship to the 
Sacramentarians, Luther's heart was perfectly at ease, and 
his mind cheerful, much as he abhorred discord in the 
visible Church. He said: "But our text is certain that it 
shall and must stand as the words read; for God Himself 
has thus placed it, and nobody durst take away or add 
*» «ingle letter. Fourthly, you know that they [the Sacra- 



LUTHEB AT MABBUBG. 85 

mentarians] disagree, and they make conflicting texts out 
of the words. As a result, they are not only uncertain, — 
which alone would be enough of the devil, — but are against 
each other, and must accuse each other of lying. But our 
text is not only certain, it is one, and plain, and harmonious 
among all of us. • Fifthly, granted that our text and inter- 
pretation be as imcertain and dark as their text and inter- 
pretation (which, of course, it is not), you nevertheless have 
the glorious, defiant (trotzig) advantage that you can with 
good conscience stand on our text and speak thus : If I shall 
and must have a dark text and interpretation, I will rather 
have the one spoken by the lips of God Himself than the one 
which proceeds from the mouth of man. And if I should be 
deceived, I would rather be deceived by God (if such were 
possible) than by men; for if God deceives me. He will 
render an account and repay me. But men cannot repay me 
(Wiedererstattung. tun), after they have defrauded me and 
have led me into hell. Such defiance the Sacramentarians 
cannot have, for they could not say: I will rather stand on 
the double text of Zwingli and Oecolampadius than on the 
single text of Christ. Hence you can cheerfully say to 
Christ, both on your deathbed and on Judgment Day: My 
dear Lord Jesus Christ, a quarrel arose about Thy words in 
the Sacrament: some would have them understood dif- 
ferently from what Jhey say. However, since those men 
offer me nothing certain, but only confuse and perplex me, 
and since they neither attempt nor succeed in proving their 
text, I remained upon Thy text, as the words read. If there 
is anything dark in them, then Thou wantedst them to be 
so dark; for Thou hast neither given any other enlighten- 
ment concerning them, nor conmaanded any to be given." 
(Erl. ed. 30, 302.) 

All Reformed church-bodies look back to Zwingli as their 
founder. His wrong doctrine is characteristic of all Prot- 
estant bodies outside of the Lutheran Church. Of the same 
spirit with Zwingli and Oecolampadius, and especially with 
the "peacemakers from Strassburg," are all churchmen, no 
matter under what name they may sally forth, who favor 



86 LUTHEB AT MABBUBG. 

church union and cooperation in the Lord's work without 
unity of faith. 

What Zwingli and Oecolampadius and the peacemakers 
from Strassburg desired was practised, for instance, just 
one hundred years ago, at the third centenary celebration 
of the Reformation. King Frederick William III united 
the Reformed and the Lutherans at Potsdam into one con- 
gregation, naming it the "Evangelical Christian Church.'' 
He received the Lord's Supper under an ambiguous formula, 
designed to please the Reformed and the Lutheran communi- 
cants. Aye, he appealed to all Protestant churches in the 
land that they follow his example. Such unification of 
the Lutheran and the Reformed Churches, brought about by 
simply ignoring the differential doctrines of both, did not 
find favor with all subjects of Frederick William III. As 
yet there were many pastors and laymen that were infbued 
with the spirit of Luther. They were made to suffer for 
their conviction. The events of those days stand as monu- 
ments to the "spirit different from ours." 

The most prominent "peacemakers from Strassburg" in 
our country are probably the pastors of the Evangelical 
Synod of North America. The confessional paragraph in 
the constitution of that synod is notorious as an exhibition 
of religious indifference. Paragraph 2 approves of the inter- 
pretation of Holy Writ as laid down in the symbolical books 
of the Lutheran Church and of the Reformed Church, as 
far as they agree with each other. Wherein they do not 
agree, the synod intends to hold to the Scripture-passages 
pertaining to such differential doctrines, making use, how- 
ever, of the liberty of conscience prevailing in the Evan- 
gelical Church. At all the altars of the churches belonging 
to this synod the Reformed and the Lutheran communicants 
are equally welcome. Let the pastors of such churches ponder 
the words of Luther, whom they praise so frequently : "I am 
unspeakably shocked to hear that both parts should seek and 
obtain the same Sacrament in the same church, at the same 
altar; and one part is to believe that he receives bread and 
wine only, the other part, that he partakes of the true body 



LUTHEB AT MARBUBG. 87 

and blood of Christ. And I often doubt whether one dare 
believe that a preacher or pastor (Seelsorger) could be so 
hardened (verstockt) and so malicious to be silent about this, 
and let each part go on, all of them imagining that they are 
receiving the same Sacrament, each according to his faith. 
But if there is such a one, he must be possessed of a heart 
which is harder than stone, steel, or diamond; yea, he must 
be an apostle of wrath. Far better than these are the Turks 
and Jews, who deny our Sacrament, and freely admit it; 
for by these we certainly remain undeceived, and, thus do 
not fall into idolatry. But these fellows must be the right 
high archdevils that give me only bread and wine, but cause 
me to believe that I am receiving the body and blood of 
Christ, thus lamentably deceiving me. . . . Therefore, who- 
soever has such a preacher, or suspects his preacher to be 
such a man, is hereby warned against him as against the 
very devil himself." (St. L. ed. XVH, 2016.) 

The spirit of the Zwinglians and of the Strassburg peace- 
makers — frivolous treatment of Scripture-passages; twist- 
ing of the text to meet the demands of human reasoning; 
tendency to unite by ignoring doctrinal differences, or finding 
formulas pleasing both parts — this "spirit so different" 
from that of Luther and his colaborers, is seeking entrance 
into each and every Lutheran synod or congregation, no 
matter how firmly they may have formerly held to the tenets 
of our dear Church. 

Let us beware! 

Refebenges : — Luther's Works : Erl. ed., Concordia Publish- 
ing House, St. Louis, ed., and Weimar ed. Seckendorf, Historia 
Lutheranismi. Christian Friedr. Junii Compendium Seckendorfia- 
num. Julius Koestlin, Martin Luther. John Lord, Beacon Lights 
of History. Wace and Buchheim, Luther's Primary Works. John 
Rae, Martin Luther: Student, Monk, Reformer. McGiffert, Mar- 
tin Luther: The Man and His Work, Preserved Smith, The Life 
and Letters of Martin Luther. John Tulloch, Leaders of the Ref- 
ormation. Richard Newton, Heroes of the Reformation. Dr. W. 
Rein, Lehen Martin Luthers. Guericke, Kirchengeschichte. Ma- 
thesius, Luthers Lehen. 



88 LUTHEB THE FAITHFUI. C0XFE880K OF CHRIST. 

Luther the Faithful Confessor of Christ 

Pbof. F. Bexte, Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, Mo. 

All men may be divided as f oUows : such as know nothing 
of Christy hence cannot confess Him; such as know of 
Christ, but reject and deny Him; and such as truly believe 
in Christ, and therefore alone are able and also willing to 
confess Him before men. And just such confession they 
should look upon as their sacred calling, their suprei]^ duty, 
and their most noble privilege. For to confess Christ is 
but a solemn way of preaching the sweet Grospel of Christ. 
"Whosoever," says Christ, "shall confess Me before men, him 
will I confess also before My Father which is in heaven." 
(Matt. 10, 32.) Accordingly, it is the clear and unmistakable 
will of God that Christians must not be satisfied with know- 
ing Christ in their minds, believing on Him in their hearts, 
and acknowledging Him before God in their secret prayers, 
but should also confess Him and His Gospel with tiieir 
mouths and lives before men in the world surrounding them. 
This holds good not only with respect to the apostles and 
disciples of the early Church, but to Christians of every 
age and place and time. And the Lord urges, this noble 
Christian privilege in phrases both solemnly serious and 
kindly promising. Why ? Because Jesus knows what courage 
it requires for Christians tp face the world especially in 
times of persecution. True Christian courage, even among 
Christians, — what a rare article it is I But the Holy Spirit 
enables and prompts us to do joyously that which our carnal 
nature abhors. Indeed, wherever and whenever needed, won- 
derful heroes are given by God to His Church, undaunted 
witnesses and bold confessors of Christ. Among the bravest 
and most courageous were the apostles, especially Peter and 
Paul, the martyrs of pagan Rome and of papal Rome, and 
many other heroic witnesses, down to the present day. The 
man, however, who courageously confessed Christ as few 
before and no one after him is none other than Dr. Martin 
Luther, whose sacred memory we celebrate with praises and 
thanksgivings to God, who made Luther what he was, blessed 



LUTHEB THE FAITHFUL CONFESSOR OF CHRIST. 89 

him, and made him a blessing to millions. When asked what 
Luther was and did to celebrate his memory, no better answer 
can be given than the one suggested by the words of Jesus, 
quoted above: Luther confessed his Savior before men; he 
was a faithful and most courageous witness of Christ. And 
this is not a mere assertion of mine, but plainly borne out 
by the facts of the Reformation history. 

1. Where did Luther confess Christ f — Wherever he stood 
and spoke, in private and in public, before high and low, 
before friend and foe, before individuals and great multi- 
tudes. Luther confessed his Savior in his own home before 
his wife and children, his servants and visitors, and especially 
in his daily talk before the numerous guests at his table. 
Luther confessed Christ in his theological chair at Witten- 
berg, lecturing for more than thirty years before thousands 
of students from all parts of Europe. Luther confessed 
Christ in numerous pulpits of Saxony and other places, 
especially in the two churches of Wittenberg. Luther con- 
fessed Christ before the common people, before students, 
professors, and learned doctors, before burgomasters, princes, 
electors, and kings. Luther confessed Christ in innumerable 
letters,- in countless sermons, in numberless lectures. Luther 
confessed Christ in his Latin books before the doctors of 
the European universities, in his German writings, especially 
in his translation of the Bible, before the German nation, 
and practically before all Europe (France, Spain, Italy, 
Holland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, England) in trans- 
lations of his books, and through scholars trained in Witten- 
berg University. Indeed, Luther, as no man after him, was 
a wonderful witness for Christ. 

2. When did Luther confess Christ f — From the day the 
great Gospel-truth, "The just shall live by faith," dawned 
on him, till his last prayer at Eisleben, "Thou hast redeemeed 
me, O faithful God," Luther never for a moment ceased to 
glorify his Savior. However, many a red-letter day rises 
sksrward as a mountain peak of bold confession in the won- 
derful life of Luther. When he, on the Slst of October, 
1517> nailed the Ninety-five Theses on the door of the Castle 



90 LUTHEB THE FAITHFUL COXFESSOB OF CHBIST. 

Church in Wittenberg, that was a powerful confession, 
which reverberated in all Europe. And when, in 1517 and 
again in 1518, Luther, before the legates of the pope, sol- 
emnly refused to recant and deny the truths which he had 
proclaimed, that, too, was a bold confession of Christ. Again, 
in 1519, in his disputation with Dr. Eck, Luther confessed 
Christ and His truth when he, with startling openness and 
boldness, declared, "I neither believe the pope, nor the church- 
councils, nor the Fathers, but 'the inspired Word of God 
alone." Another bold confession of Christ it was when 
Luther, in 1521, on his way to Worms, entreated by the people 
to return 'to Wittenberg, declared that he would go and 
confess his Master in spite of devils as numerous in Worms 
as the tiles on its roofc. And when, on the memorable 
18th day of April, Luther, at the diet of Worms, stood and 
spoke before the Emperor, the nobles and dignitaries of the 
realm, and closed his solemn refusal to recant and deny 
Christ with the words, "Here I stand, I cannot otherwise; 
God help me. Amen," the great Reformer had reached the 
Alpine peak of Christian confession before men. And many 
other momentous days of noble confession, e. g., in 1529, 
at Marburg; in 1530, at Augsburg; in 1537, at Smalcald, — 
days too numerous to describe, — grace the life of Luther, 
who was, indeed, a great confessor and a most courageous 
witness of Christ. 

3. And what did Luther confess of Christ? — He con- 
fessed that Christ is the only and perfect Savior of the 
human race. The Romanists urged men to save themselves, 
to reconcile God, win His favor and earn His pardon by 
their own efforts, rosaries, works, and penances; they glori- 
fied man and denied Christ and His salvation. Luther, how- 
ever, denouncing all this as heathenish, and preaching the 
Gospel of pure grace, the Gospel of reconciliation with God 
already accomplished, of pardon already earned and fully 
granted, of the justification of the whole world already pro- 
claimed, and hence the Gospel of complete salvation, not by 
works of our own, but by grace and faith only, — Luther, 
^ing thus, confessed Christ to be our perfect and only 



LUTHEB THE FAITHFUL CONFESSOR OF CHRIST. 91 

Savior. The Romanists, persuading the people to trust in 
the sacrificial mass of priests, in the intercession of saints^ 
and in papal indulgences, glorified man, the priest and his 
work, and denied Christ and His sacrifice. Luther, however, 
condemning all this as sacrilegious, and urging men to con- 
fide in the perfect obedience and in the holy, innocent sacri- 
fice of Mount Calvary, victoriously proclaimed Christ to be 
our only High Priest, and His death as the only atoning 
sacrifice. The Romanists, compelling the people, in blind 
faith, to follow the pope and obey the hierarchy, raged and 
rebelled against, and rejected, Christ, and in His stead estab- 
lished and adored the great Antichrist. Luther, however, 
condemning all this as antichristian idolatry, and persuading 
men to listen to, believe in, and follow, the divine voice of 
the Gospel and the inspired Word of God in the Bible alone, 
triumphantly confessed Christ to be our only Head and 
Master, our only Prophet and King. Indeed, the Romanists, 
even as millions of false Christians to-day, flaunted the name 
of Christ and His cross, but disgraced, dishonored, rejected, 
condemned, and crucified the Christ of the Gospel. Luther, 
however, glorified the true Christ, not Christ the new Law- 
giver, not Christ the Judge, not Christ the wise Jewish 
Rabbi, not Christ the great Social Reformer, not Christ the 
wonderful Healer, not Christ the great Miracle Man, not 
Christ the Pacificist, not Christ the Millennialist, not Christ 
the Ethical Culturist, — but the real Christ, the Christ of the 
Bible, of the Gospel; the Christ who died because of our 
transgressions, and rose again for our justification; the 
Christ who made God our dear Father, and caused Him to 
pour out His love, grace, and pardon on a godless world of 
lost, condemned, and helpless sinners. Luther was a faith- 
ful witness of Christ; before a world of foes he confessed 
Him to be our perfect and only Savior, our only Prophet, 
Priest, and King. 

4. What other truths did Luther confess? — Space per- 
mits us to mention a few only. Luther protested against the 
Roman claim that the pope is the head of the Church, and 
he confessed the truth, "One is your Master, even Christ; 



92 LUTUEB THE S-AITHPUI. CONFBSSOB OF CHBIST. 

and all ye are brethren" (Matt- 23, 8). Luther protested 
against the yoke of bondage and against the conunandmenta 
of men with which the Roman hierarchy loaded down the 
laity, and he proclaimed the spiritual freedom of Christians, 
and urged them, "to stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ 
hath made us free, and not to be entangled again with the 
yoke of bondage" (Gal, 5, 1). Luther, protesting against the 
godless vow of celibacy, proclaimed wedlock to be a divine 
ordinance, and in 1525 confirmed his testimony by his own 
marriage, in his day an act of singular boldness and true 
Christian heroism. Luther protested against the idolatry 
of serving and adoring Mary, the saints, and their relics, 
and he stood by the word of Christ, "Thou shalt worship the 
Lord, thy God, and Him only shalt thou serve" (Matt. 4, 10). 
Luther protested against the Soman Mass as a sacrifice for 
the living and the dead, and confessed the fundamental 
Christian truth that Christ by one offering has perfected 
forever them that are sanctified (Heb. 10, 14), Luther pro- 
tested against the awful Roman doctrine of the purgatory, 
and he confessed the aweet Christian truth, "Bleaaed are the 
dead which die in the Lord from henceforth" (Rev. 14, 13). 
Luther protested against the Roman doctrine and awful 
practise of persecuting and burning heretics, and he con- 
fessed the truth which did away with horrors unspeakable, 
viz., that the only weapon of the Church is c6nviction by 
the sword of the Spirit, the Word of God. Luther protested 
against the arrogant claim that kings, princes, and all govern- 
ments are subject to, receive their power from, and owe 
obedience to, the pope, and he confessed the great principle 
of the absolute division and separation of State and Church, 
and that in matters temporal, and not conflicting with con- 
aciencf, the pope and priest as well as all other citizens are 
aubject tc Caesar. In a similar manner Luther championed 
truth and fought error wherever he met it. He was a faithful 
witness of Christ. 

6. Zfojy did Luther confess these truths? — Genuine con- 

■~^ "'ion is the unison of heart and mouth and life; and Luther 

sslkI Christ in this way. His confession came from the 



LUTHEB THE FAITHFUL CONFESSOR OF CHRIST. 93 

deepest depths of his heart, as the spirit of his prayers and 
writings testify. In veritable streams of words, spoken and 
written, Luther confessed Christ with his tongue and pen. 
And what Luther confessed in words he also acted, bringing 
his whole life into agreement with the sentiments of his heart 
and speech. Lideed, Romanists, unable to refute his doc- 
trines, have for centuries resorted to vilifying Luther and 
besmirching his good name. But, although Luther's life 
was for decades an open boc^, daily read, as never the life 
of a man before or after him, by everybody in Wittenberg, 
foe as well as friend, yet the traducers of Luther have not 
been able to produce as much as a single competent and 
trustworthy witness against him. Luther lived what he 
preached. The whole Luther, his heart, his word, his life, 
was a chord ringing harmoniously in the confession of 
Christ. And this confession was rendered with the effi- 
ciency of a chosen vessel of God, with wonderful ability 
in everj'^thing required for such a task in a world of ene- 
mies, with consummate skill in the use especially of the 
German language, and with rare wisdom of suiting his words 
and actions to the ever shifting situation. And withal, 
Luther revealed a bold disregard of his own safety, and 
a self-sacrifice which made him a martyr a hundred times 
over. Luther was accustomed to saying that he would have 
his body torn into a thousand pieces rather than deny Christ 
and His Gospel, rather than acknowledge the pope and his 
infamous dogmas. And this was not a mere bluff. From 
1517 to 1546, for more than 10,000 days, Luther attended to 
his daily vocation in Wittenberg with ever increasing bold- 
ness in his testimony, and with absolute disregard of the 
papal and imperial ban, and the fury of his numerous 
enemies. Till his very last breath Luther never for a moment 
lacked the supreme courage which he showed at Worms in • 
1521, and which even the unbelieving world never ceases to 
admire. How, then, did Luther confess Christ ? We answer : 
Courageously, perseveringly, efficiently, consistently. Ah, 
yes, Luther did confess his Master! 

6. What moved Luther thus to confess his Savior? — 



94 LUTHEB THE FAITHFUL GOXFESSOB OF CHBIST. 

Luther answered that question himself at Worms, when he 
declared, "I cannot otherwise; I cannot help it; I must 
confess!'' That is what the fire would say when asked why 
it bums; the sun, why he shines. It was Luther's nature, 
his Christian nature, to confess his Savior. Luther in his 
own heart had experienced the terrors of the Law and the 
quickening sweetness of Christ and His Gospel; hence he 
cried, "I cannot otherwise; I must confess my dear Savior; 
my heart is full of Him I" And being a Christian, Luther 
also had a quickened conscience. When his enemies cried, 
"You are a heretic, — recant; you are a rebel, — submit 
yourself; you are damned and cursed by the pope, — 
repent," Luther did but — could but — answer, "I cannot 
otherwise; I must confess. I would stand condemned by 
my own conscience, condemned by my God, ah, yes, con- 
demned and rejected and denied by Christ, if I should refuse 
to confess Him whom I know to be my Savior, and refuse 
to proclaim the Gospel which I know to be the only truth. 
Warned by my conscience, I cannot otherwise; I must give 
testimony to Christ and His truth." And deep in the heart 
of Luther there was that burning fire of love for his fellow- 
men, especially for his own dear Germans. "For my Ger- 
mans," said Luther, "I was born; them will I serve." 
Beholding the abject slavery of his fellow-men, and realizing 
how the Roman hierarchy had taken possession of their prop- 
erty, their family, their body, their soul, their heart, their 
mind, and their very conscience, Luther, moved by com- 
passion, cried out, "I cannot otherwise, love constrains me; 
I must confess; I must deliver them from bondage. The 
Gospel and the liberty which made me free and happy I must 
give to my fellow-men." To save and deliver, to bless and 
enrich, his fellow-men, such was the motive that moved and 
impelled Luther to sacrifice himself in the confession of 
Christ and in the proclamation of His Gospel. Luther con- 
fessed his Savior. 

7. And how was Luther confessed and acknowledged hy 
Christ f — Being a faithful confessor, Luther had, according 
to the words quoted above, been promised by Christ: "I will 



LUTHEB THE FAITHFUL CONFESSOR OF CHRIST. 95 

confess you before My Father which is in heaven." And 
Jesus fulfilled this promise by giving Luther a blessed deaths 
by crowning him with the crown of life, and by leading him 
to his eternal reward at the hands of His heavenly Father. 
Jesus kept His promise; and He did more. He confessed 
Luther also before men, even during his life, and down to 
the present day. Christ blessed Luther, and made him 
a blessing to many. He crowned his testimony with a won- 
derful success, such as was granted to no other man since 
the days of the apostles. The effects of Luther's confession 
were felt far beyond the boundaries of Germany, in Denmark, 
Switzerland, Norway, Sweden, England, Scotland, France, 
Spain, Italy; and to-day they are apparent in all Europe 
and beyond, especially in America. Jesus confessed Luther 
before men! And when Antichrist made determined efforts 
to root out Lutheranism in the Smalcald War of 1547; 
when in all Catholic countries the terrible inquisitions sought 
their victims by the thousands; when Lutherans were pub- 
licly burned at auio-da-fes; when wholesale slaughters of 
Protestants were inaugurated in Holland, France, and Eng- 
land; and when, in a final mad effort, the Jesuits kindled 
the Thirty Years' War in order to annihilate Protestantism, 
— then Jesus, rising from the throne of majesty, stretched 
forth His protecting hand over the work of Luther, with 
the marvelous result that to-day 160 millions of Protestants 
the world over, directly or indirectly, trace their origin to 
Luther and his Reformation. Jesus did confess Luther! 
Indeed, the innumerable Reformation festivals celebrated 
every year all over the globe, what are they but public con- 
fessions and approvals granted by our Savior to Luther and 
his work? In this year of jubilee the world is witnessing 
a celebration of the four-hundredth anniversary of Luther's 
first public confession of Christ in 1517, as was never wit- 
nessed before I No, Jesus did not fail to confess His faithful 
servant, neither before men nor before His heavenly Father. 
Indeed, we, too, are glad and proud to be among the hosts 
whom God has blessed through Luther. Yea, as members 
of the Missouri Synod and the Synodical Conference, we are 



96 LUTHER THE FAITHFUL C0NFES80B OF CHBIST. 

among the most blessed of all the children of the Reforma- 
tion, for we are entrusted with the Gospel as preached in 
its original purity by Luther. And richly blessing this 
testimony of the Gospel among us, God has thereby, also in 
our own midst, crowned Luther and his work. The Synodical 
Conference is a twig in the crown of glory which Christ 
has placed upon the head of His faithful servant and bold 
confessor. Dr. M. Luther. 

8. Finally, how should all this affect usf — Well, we are 
Lutherans and should follow Luther's example. From the 
Word of God we are convinced that the Gospel which Luther 
confessed is the eternal truth of God. And if it be true 
that one iota of the Bible shall not pass away, then Luther's 
doctrine pure, drawn, as it is, from the Bible, cannot perish. 
Hence it must be our privilege and duty to continue in these 
truths, to guard them from corruption, and to confess them, 
even as Luther did, and from the same motives. Continuing 
in, and confessing, these truths, we must also protest against 
all errors, such also as may originate within our own Lu- 
theran churches. Continuing in these truths, we must oppose 
the false doctrines emanating from the numerous Protestant 
sects. Confessing our Christian creed, we must with all our 
heart condemn modem rationalism and liberalism, which for 
decades have been blasting the very foundations of our faith 
and torpedoing in mid-ocean the Ship of Christ, the Church 
of God. Above all, we dare not ignore the "old wicked Foe," 
that implacable, unscrupulous enemy of the pure Gospel of 
Christ and its confessors, — all the more so, because it is 
evidently the plan of Rome to regain in the New World 
what she has lost in the Old. "Romanize America, God 
wills it!" such is the war-cry of the Catholic hierarchy in 
America. And with great cunning and power, and in sheep's 
clothing, they endeavor to accomplish their sinister object. 
Rome has not changed I The Reformation has but hardened 
her heart against the truth, increased her cunning, and made 
her more guarded in her methods and modes of procedure. 
The Council of Trent reaffirmed all of Rome's arrogant 
claims and pernicious teachings, and anathematized the 



THE THREE PRINCIPLES OF THE REFORMATION. 97 

Gospel with all its Protestant confessors. Down to the 
present day the sole authority of the Bible is rejected, and 
Bible-societies are cursed by Rome. In 1854, Pius IX, de- 
claring the dogma of the Immaculate Conception, gave 
a renewed impetus to the idolatrous worship of Mary and 
the saints. And the same pontiff, in 1870, declaring the 
papal infallibility, capped the climax of Roman Antichris- 
tianity. Against all this we must continue to protest and 
confess the truth as Luther set the example. And the 
patriotic love which we owe to our country must constrain 
us to oppose all efforts of the Roman hierarchy at destroying 
our American liberties, abolishing the separation of State ^ 
and Church, and politically establishing their sectarian 
churches and schools. 

Such is the debt of gratitude which we owe for the Refor- 
mation, God blessed Luther that he, confessing Christ, 
might become a blessing to us. And God blessed us through 
Luther that we, in turn, confessing Christ, might be a blessing 
to others. And if, in faithfully confessing our Savior before 
men, we follow in the steps of Luther, Christ, who did not 
fail Luther, will assuredly not fail us in keeping the gracious 
promise: "Whosoever confesseth Me before men, him will 
I confess also before My Father which is in heaven." So 
be it ! God grant it ! 



The Three Principles of the Reformation: 
Sola Scriptura, Sola Gratia, Sola Fides. 

Prof. Theo. Engelder, Concordia Seminary, Springfield, 111. 

The Reformation was not Luther's work, but God's work. 
None knew that better than Luther himself. "God's Word 
has been my sole study and concern, the sole subject of my 
preaching and writing. Other than this I have done nothing 
in the matter. This same Word has, while I slept or made 
merry, accomplished this great thing." 

It was God's work, but God performed His work through 
Luther. None knew that better than the papists themselves. 

Four Hundred Years. 7 



98 THE THREE PBINCIPLES OF THE BEFOBMATION. 

if they only would admit it. Boussuet, bishop of Meaux, 
admits it. "Luther is the trumpet, or rather he is the 
thunder, he is the lightning, which has aroused the world 
from its lethargy; it was not so much Luther that spoke as 
God, whose lightnings burst from his lips." 

The divine truths which, voiced by Luther, awakened 
men from death (for only a Romanist will speak of a mere 
lethargy in this connection) were, first: Sola Scriptura. 
That was the reassuring answer given to the insistent cry 
of men: Who shall tell us the truth, God's truth, in the 
matter concerning our soul's salvation? The very first words 
of Luther spoken before the world at large proclaimed this 
principle. It found utterance in the opening words of the 
Ninety-Five Theses, "When our Lord and Master Jesus 
Christ said — ", and in their conclusion, "I am not so sense- 
less as to be willing that the Word of God should be made 
to give place to fables, devised by human reason." Those 
were strange words for that day and generation. Men had 
been wont to say: When our lord and master at Rome says. 
Hus, indeed, had lifted his voice in protest a hundred years 
before, and Wyclif , too, before him ; but the body of one and 
the bones of the other had to bum for it, and the deadly hold 
of Antichrist on the life of the Church had only tightened. 
But now Luther was raised up to declare,' and to establish, 
too, for all times, that the question of indulgences and every 
other matter concerning our salvation was to be decided on 
no other basis than that of the saying of our Lord and 
Master Jesus Christ. Scripture is the only source of the 
saving doctrine. No man has authority to speak for God 
in these matters. What God says in the Scriptures, that 
and that alone is the truth. And the full truth. Nothing 
must be added to it, nothing taken from it. Not by the pope 
nor by any other creature. Poor human nature is bound to 
set up an authority of its own, and if it cannot be the pope, 
it shall be something else just as human. And so Erasmus 
and Zwingli began to inquire of reason for God's truth, 
and Muenzer and Schwenkfeld thought to dream spiritual 
dreams; and to this day men busy themselves in setting 



THE THREE PBINCIPLES OP THE BEFOBMATION. 99 

up new authorities, or rather in labeling the old rejected 
authority with new labels, such as "the best thought of the 
day," "Christian thought and experience," "the Christian 
himself." But Luther would hear of no fables, devised by 
human reason. "Erasmus does not know the first principle, 
the basis and rule: Holy Scripture; God's Word must 
remain empress. You must follow straight after Scripture 
and receive it and utter not one syllable against it, for it 
is God's mouth." But if you exclude our profound reason- 
ings and our sweet dreams, the Church will be deprived of 
some needful truth? The Smalcald Articles give answer 
at once and to the point : "God will not deal with us except 
through His external Word and Sacrament, and whatever 
proudly introduces itself as the Spirit instead of the Word 
and Sacrament is the very devil." There shall be no mis- 
understanding on this point: "Nothing else than the Word 
of God, not even an angel, shall establish articles of faith." 
That uncompromising sola — "nothing else than" — is 
there for a purpose. Rome was ready with a compromise. 
She was willing to acknowledge the authority of Scripture 
and did not hesitate to extol the sanctity of the Bible. But 
it must be Scripture as interpreted by the Church, or the 
councils, or tradition, or the teachings of the fathers, meaning 
in every case the pope. So also Zwingli and the other 
dreamers of dreams: We declare the Scriptures to be the 
Word of God, a heavenly Word, a glorious Word, yea, the 
supreme authority. Our philosophy and our visions shall 
not and do not supplant, but only interpret Scripture. They 
serve to bring out its hidden glory. But Luther would have 
none of it. He knew that, if it were not Scripture solely, 
it would not be Scripture at all. If reason is not content 
to let Scripture stand as it is, its only purpose in amending 
is to strike out. Passing Scripture- truth through the chan- 
nel of human reason is to divest it of its divine truth — 
else it will not pass through. The condition of theology 
in the schools of Rome demonstrated that. And so nothing 
else than the Word of God, not even what you are inclined 



100 THE THBEE PRINCIPLES OF THE BEFOBMATION. 

to look upon as a messenger from the very throne of God, 
shall establish articles of faith. 

This meant, of course, that all articles so established 
must be received with unquestioning faith and upheld in 
the face of the opposition of an outraged world. Luther 
so understood it. They might rage; he would not retract 
one syllable. They hurled massive tomes of popish theology, 
reinforced with all the authority of the schoolmen, at him; 
he waved them aside, as not coming under the sola Scriptura. 
They sought to frighten him by identifying his principle 
with the condemned principle of Hus ; as soon as he learned 
where Hus stood in this matter, he was glad to identify 
himself in this matter with the blessed martyr. At Worms 
they sought to impress him with all the awful authority of 
the Koman Empire — terrestrial and infernal Kome — ; 
Luther had sworn allegiance to the Scriptures as the empress, 
and repeated the oath: "Unless I am convinced by the 
testimony of the Word of God or by clear and cogent reasons, 
as I cannot submit my faith to the pope nor to the councils, 
which have manifestly often erred and contradicted them- 
selves, and as I am bound in conscience by the passages 
I have quoted, I cannot and will not retract anything." 
And all Zwingli's pleading for the authority of reason could 
not move this rock: "The text stands there too powerful." 
Sola Scriptura with Luther meant: "I place over against 
all sentences of the fathers and the artful words of all 
angels, men, and devils the Scripture and Gospel. Here 
I make my stand, here I utter my proud defiance. To me 
God's Word is above all, and the majesty of God is on 
my side." 

Why did Luther insist on the sola Scriptura? !N"ot 
because the matter was interesting to him as a mere academic 
question; he had no time for the discussion of mere aca- 
demic questions. Nor was it because of some obstinate fiber 
in his character; where God's Word was not concerned, 
Luther was of all men most broad-minded. Why, if it 
pleased the Church, she might make an order that all clergy- 
men should wear not one, but three surplices, and Luther 



THE THREE PBINCIPLES OF THE BEFOBMATION. 101 

felt himself broad enough to don all three. Nor was it 
merely a question of morality. It is, indeed, the height of 
wickedness to permit human authority to usurp the place 
of the divine authority, and it is a crime against humanity 
to cause men to receive the opinion of any fellow-man as 
binding upon his conscience — in any matter, and most of 
all in the sacred province of faith. But these considerations 
come in later, inevitably and necessarily, but later. The 
chief and all-important consideration was that, in seeking 
the way of salvation, it is fatal to follow a human guide. 
For all men are liars — liars when they construct, liars 
when they reconstruct, the doctrine. Here is no room for 
man-made dogmas. God's truth alone will answer — "nothing 
but the Scriptures." And so Luther declared to the end, 
declared it in his last sermon preached in Wittenberg: 
"I shall swerve not one finger's breadth from the mouth of 
Him who said: "Hear ye Him." 

Hearing Him and Him alone, Luther learned a glorious 
truth. Two words — and all Scripture was written for their 
sake — ; two words — and all spiritual life, and so also the 
life of the Reformation, sprung from them — : sola gratia. 
They tell the despairing sinner that God, in His infinite 
mercy, has laid all the sins of the world on Jesus; that he 
is not required to bring about his salvation by his own works ; 
that his sins are forgiven him freely, by grace. — Rome 
had established a different doctrine : Man is justified, wholly 
or in part, by his own merit. How firmly this damnable 
doctrine was established! Even the preaching of Hus and 
Wyclif was yet somewhat tainted with it. It pleases the 
natural man to be told that he can be his own savior. He 
was even willing, in the interest of human merit, to commit 
the vile abomination of having the pope sell him letters of 
pardon, because, forsooth, they were drawn on the surplus 
holiness deposited by the saints of Rome in Rome's keeping. 
And they who were not willing to accept this worthless paper 
were still ready to commit an abomination equally as vile: 
to offer God in heaven their own spurious holiness in pay- 
ment for eternal salvation. Over against this natural prin- 



102 THE THREE PRINCIPLES OF THE REFORMATION. 

ciple Luther declared: "The true treasure of the Church is 
the holy Gospel of the glory and grace of God." (Thesis 62.) 
It formed the burden of all his teaching, as it is the heart 
of Scripture: "Grace brings about this great thing that 
wq are accounted wholly and fully just before God." 

Luther and his fellow-laborers knew the supreme im- 
portance of this article, and no power in earth and hell couM 
move them to yield it. "Let us, therefore, hold it for certain 
and firmly established that the soul can do without every- 
thing except the Word of God, the Gospel concerning His 
Son, incarnate, suffering, risen, and glorified." Under the 
principle of justification through self-righteousness Luther 
had been groping in darkness, sinking into despair; but 
when the principle of justification by faith lodged in his 
soul, "then the whole Scripture was opened to me and also 
heaven itself. Immediately I felt as if bom anew, as if 
I had found the open gate of paradise." How could they 
yield this glorious truth ? Unless we obtain, says the Apology, 
remission of sin through Christ, there can be no remission, 
^ for if salvation be by the Law, the whole Law must be kept ; 
but pious souls know they cannot keep the law; and there 
is nothing left but despair. So when all pious souls implored 
them to stand fast, they gave answer in the Smalcald Arti- 
cles: "Whatever may happen, though heaven and earth 
should fall, nothing in this article can be yielded or rescinded. 
(Acts 4, 2; Is. 53, 3.) We must, therefore, be entirely 
certain of this and not doubt it, otherwise all will be lost, 
and the devil and our opponents will prevail and obtain 
the victory." 

Nothing in this article can be yielded. Here was Rome 
offering another compromise. She was ready to make copious 
use of the word grace, but the sola must be yielded, and 
a place, be it ever so small, granted to human merit. But 
Luther stood out for the sola. If our justification depends 
on one single good work, our case is hopeless, for that one 
good work will ever be lacking, and the honest soul knows 
it to its despair. Nor would Luther suffer the man of sin 
to belie the glorious riches of the grace of God by denying 



THE THBEE PBINCIPLES OF THE BEFOBMATION. 103 

that God is willing to do it all. "Grace will not be halved 
nor quartered, but receives us wholly and completely into 
favor." Luther knew, as Augustine knew before him, that 
grace is not grace in any way, if it be not freely (gratis) 
given in every way, and he knew that the pope knew it, too. 
To compromise on the pope's terms meant, here as always, 
a complete surrender to him. He stood for justification 
through works alone. He knew that if one good work were 
granted to corrupt nature, all good works would have to be 
granted; again, that if men were permitted to think of 
works in connection with grace, they would think of works 
alone and of grace not at all. He did, indeed, diligently use 
the word grace and even consented to describe the merit of 
Christ as superabundant, but not only did he make the 
efficacy of this superabundance dependent on human worthi- 
ness, thus subtracting one half from grace, and so leaving 
nothing of grace, he also deliberately divested the word grace 
of its Scriptural meaning, and gave it the meaning of human 
holiness. No doubt, on these terms he was ready to make 
diligent use of the word grace. It did not take Melanchthon 
long to see through the trickery, and he indignantly ex- 
claimed: "The fool" (meaning Eck, Rome's emissary) "does 
not understand the word grace." And in order to make him 
understand, sola was put in. It had to be either the prin- 
ciple of Rome: Justification through human merit alone, 
or the principle of Scripture: Justification by grace alone. 
And that means: Salvation by grace alone, salvation in 
every respect, from beginning to end. When a man once 
sincerely accepts the article of justification by grace alone, 
what happens? "This one article rules my heart, namely, 
faith in Christ, out of which by day and night all my 
theological thoughts flow, by which they move, to which they 
return." Now he sees grace everywhere. 'For "now the 
whole Scripture was opened to me." And Scripture, you 
know, does not halve nor quarter grace. If grace is any- 
where, it is everywhere. Men are willing to speak of justifi- 
cation by grace alone, but they restrict grace to that one 
point. But if a man is not absolutely in need of grace in 



104 THE THREE PRINCIPLES OF THE REFORMATION. 

conversion, he does not absolutely need it in justification. 
Therefore Luther rejected and condemned "as erroneous all 
doctrines which extol our free will, as they are directly 
opposed to the aid and grace of our Savior Jesus Christ." 
And the Formula of Concord adds the indorsement: "The 
Holy Scriptures ascribe man's conversion, faith in Christ, 
regeneration, renovation, and all that pertains to the actual 
commencement and accomplishment of them, not to the 
human powers of the natural free will, either as to the whole 
or the half or the least or most insignificant part, but in 
solidum, that is, wholly and entirely, to the divine operation." 
You cannot deny grace at one point, and trust in it at 
another; and he who waits to be converted without grace, 
will never reach justification by grace. All theological 
thoughts of the Reformation had but one source : sola gratia. 
We love the word and pronounce it at every step of our 
salvation. 

Sola gratia and sola Scriptura go together. Witness the 
pope and Erasmus and the rest — because they held the sola 
gratia in abomination, they detested the sola Scriptura. And 
because justification by grace is not found in any human 
authority, God gave us the Scriptures. If we yield the sola 
Scriptura, we lose the sola gratia. And the more we love 
the article of justification by grace, the more we despise — 
in this matter — all human authority. 

In order to uphold the sola gratia, it became necessary 
to emphasize another truth: sola fides. To us it is very clear 
that a free promise requires only acceptance, that is, faith, 
and excludes payments, that is, works, — considered as pay- 
ment. Justification by grace means, and can only mean, 
justification through faith. But the perversion of Rome 
made it necessary to emphasize it, and Luther always did it. 
"To preach Christ is to justify the soul and to save it, if 
it believe the preaching. — For the Word of God cannot be 
received and honored by any works, but by faith alone. 
Hence it is clear that as the soul needs the Word alone for 
faith and justification, so it is justified by faith alone, and 
not by any works." 



THE THREE PRINCIPLES OF THE REFORMATION. 105 

There is that Lutheran sola again. There was nothing 
to be gotten from this man Luther. And how they hated 
his spiritual insight and resultant "obstinacy"! We hear 
the plaint of the pope's man, Cajetan: "I have no desire 
to dispute further with this beast, for he has penetrating 
eyes, and wonderful thoughts revolve in his head." — Here 
Antichrist was making his last stand. If he could establish 
the position that man is justified not alone by faith, but 
also by works, he would win, for it would then no longer 
be grace in every respect and so not grace at all. And Luther 
had penetrating eyes, and knew there could be no joyful 
acceptance of the promise, no spiritual life, no Reforma- 
tion, without these four letters: sola. When he, therefore, 
preached on justification, he would read the text in this wise : 
"We conclude that a man is justified by faith alone, without 
the deeds of the Law." Rome moved heaven and earth to 
have that anti-Roman "alone" stricken out, and even spoke 
of forgery, but Luther patiently explained to them that the 
word always was there, plain to the Christian eye, and that 
merely because of their blindness it had to be written large. 
To strike it out would mean the elimination of faith. For, 
as above, give man one little work to look at, and he will 
see nothing else; pride will take the place of faith, and 
shortly despair will take the place of pride. Also Luther's 
penetrating eyes saw at once that Rome's object was to make 
it not faith and works, but works alone. For that purpose 
the word faith was given a new meaning, and they tried 
to impose on Melanchthon with their new word. But Luther 
told him: "You write that you have forced Eck to admit 
that we are justified by faith. I wish you had forced him 
not to lie." In the Roman dictionary faith now means some- 
thing-which receives its value from works. It justifies because 
it leads men to keep the Ten Commandments. There faith 
and works are synonyms. Melanchthon, of course, could 
not force Eck not to lie, but the thing to do in such a case 
he did do: he fully exposed, in the Apology, the lie, the 
"sophistry fabricated by these ungodly men." And so it 
remained sola fide, and so the sola gratia was established, and 
so the Reformation pursued its divine way. 



106 THE THBEE PBINCIPLES OF THE BEFOBMATION. 

Faith alone, but faith indeed. It became the business 
of the Reformation to teach men to believe, that is, to appro- 
priate, every man to himself, the promise of the Gospel with 
joyful confidence. In the old shameful days men had been 
led to think they had faith when they gave an unthinking 
assent to whatever it pleased the priest to tell them, and the 
priest did not eveii have to tell them exactly what it was, and 
men were warned against being certain of their salvation 
as against wicked presumptuousness. If once living faith 
took the place of this ignorant, doubting, dead "faith," the 
rule of Rome was doomed. So Cajetan had orders, right in 
the beginning, to induce Luther to retract the statement 
that a person desiring to receive the Sacrament of the Altar 
must have faith of his own. But what Rome hated above 
all things Luther prized above all things. He knew that 
the Word of promise calls for undoubting faith, and he knew 
that only in faith there is life and joy and holiness, and, 
what is more, he knew that, where this promise is preached, 
"faith is always and ever called forth and nourished." 

So when after the days of Augsburg an imperial edict 
forbade under pain of death the preaching of justification 
by faith alone, as subversive of all decency, Luther published 
an edict of his own, which provided: "Whereas Satan will 
not refrain nor desist from blaspheming this chief article, 
therefore I, Dr. Martinus Luther, our Lord Jesus Christ's 
unworthy evangelist, do say and pronounce that this article 
shall stand and abide in spite of the Roman Emperor, the 
Tartar Emperor, the Persian Emperor, the pope, all cardinals, 
bishops, priests, monks, nuns, kings, princes, all the world 
together with all evil spirits." He established further in this 
Lutheran edict that this faith which alone justifies alone 
produces that godly life which Rome had succeeded in com- 
pletely destroying in her domain. And then he bids defiance 
to them all: "That is our doctrine, and so teaches the Holy 
Ghost and the whole Christian Church, and therein we shall 
abide in the name of God. Amen." 

There is no question that this article: salvation by grace 
through faith as taught by the Scriptures, is the essence of 



THE THREE PRINCIPLES OF THE REFORMATION. 107 

Luther's teaching. We have Rome's testimony to that effect. 
Why else did she order all of his books to be burned? 

And these six words — sola Scriptura, sola gratia, sola 
fides — gave new life to the dying Church. There can be 
no question about that either. Some few would like to 
question it. They say the Reformation was the result of 
the natural development of the nations. The Reformation, 
so strongly denying the existence of any spiritual insight 
and strength in man, and yet the outgrowth of this same 
spiritual insight, — how can one so shamelessly repudiate 
one's parent ? ! No. Whatever development was going on 
was ever made to serve the purposes of the master-mind at 
Rome. Emperors opposed him; he deposed them, or, what 
answered the same purpose, allied himself with them and 
made the secular power his handmaiden. The general coun- 
cils met and deeply deliberated; he had them assert as 
strongly as possible his principle of salvation by works, 
meanwhile suffering them to play awhile with big words, — 
"supreme authority of the councils," — knowing full well 
that poor mankind will rather submit to one great man than 
to many small men. But humanism — learning, — classic 
learning at that, — fine thoughts, and the ideals of antiquity ? 
Why, Leo X himself was an ideal humanist — and an ideal 
pope. But, surely, when reason, cold, pitiless reason, took up 
the fight, and men began to think, and to think very seriously, 
they would break the disgraceful fetters? Well, the school- 
men of old were as great thinkers as any, and they could 
think of nothing but himian merit; and the rationalists of 
a later day, the reasoners par excellence, reasoned out nothing 
but Pelagianism. Sinful man can think only in terms of 
self-righteousness, and all the progress he makes consists 
in inventing new terms, which are equivalent to the old ones, 
and serve a reactionary purpose. Human forces did not 
bring about the Reformation. There Satan was at the helm. 

No, God did it, — God's Word, — this truth: salvation 
by grace, through faith as taught by the Scriptures. 

It needed a preacher, indeed, and it made a preacher 
unto itself. Luther did not form the principles of the 



108 THE THREE PBINCIPLES OF THE BEFOBMATION. 

Reformation, but these principles formed Luther. There 
he was, clinging to the deadly principle of self -righteousness, 
cringing before the authority of the false Church, till the 
heavenly truth of salvation by grace, through faith as taught 
by the Scriptures made its way into his heart, and con- 
quered him, and opened the gates of Paradise unto him. 
Thus he learned the one needful truth, and this same truth 
made of him a fit preacher of it. A zealous preacher; his 
heart burned with fierce indignation against those who were 
leading his brothers to despair, with a consuming desire to 
give them the sweet tidings of salvation. A safe preacher; 
not the old error nor "thirty new ones," which lay in wait 
for him, could gain entrance into his heart — "the text stood 
there too powerful." A fearless and confident preacher; 
his friends need not bother about him; let "the Father be 
gracious to our Lord Jesus. If His affairs are taken care 
of, my case is also won." A wise preacher; he knew what 
means to employ to do his work: "God accomplishes more 
with His Word than you and I and all the world could 
accomplish with our forces combined. We must first gain 
the hearts of the people, which is done by preaching the 
Gospel." 

And so the issue was joined: Luther against the world. 
It was an unequal contest: the world against the Word of 
God. It was not the "poor monk" who needed to quake, but 
the man at Rome, against whom the forces of heaven were 
marching. For a brief space he was pleased to speak dis- 
dainfully of the "monkish wrangling" going on in barbarous 
Germany, and, indeed, what did he know of grace and faith 
and Scriptural authority! Lo, this "monkish wrangling," 
this divine wrangling, which insisted on sola Scriptura, sola 
gratia, sola fides, set Christendom free, and pronounced the 
eternal judgment on all who were bound to remain under the 
banner: Sola Roma. 

Nothing could restrain the Reformation. Now again, as 
in the apostolic times, "the Word of God grew and multi- 
plied." Luther had foretold it: "By the Word the world 
has been conquered, by the Word the world has been saved. 



THE THBEE PRINCIPLES OF THE EEFORMATION. 109 

by the Word she will be restored." "Good men," says the 
Apology, "are calling for truth and proper instruction from 
the Word. of God; and to them death is less bitter than the 
bitterness of doubt in any point of doctrine." And here was 
Scriptural authority. And again: "Without this article 
the poor conscience can have no true, abiding, and certain 
consolation." And here was what the wearied souls needed. 
At once faith sprang up and eagerly appropriated the blessing. 
And God's Word grew and created men who thought divine 
thoughts, thoughts of joy and thanksgiving. Thoughts such 
as this divine thought: "A Christian man is the most free 
lord of all and subject to none," — a godly declaration of 
independence: no man shall rule the conscience of God's 
child! And this divine thought: "A Christian man is the 
most dutiful servant of all and subject to every one," — 
a declaration for social service which consisted not of noble 
words, but existed in noble deeds. And the Word of God 
caused men eagerly to spread this same Word. In shops and 
palaces they loved to speak of it ; the household gathered about 
the open Bible; the Gospel-preaching filled the churches; 
schools sprang up to nurture the gentle youth in the faith of 
their Savior. And the Word of God multiplied. At Worms 
a solitary confessor, at Augsburg already a goodly band, and 
soon there were in every land those who feared God and gave 
Him glory. 

Arid these principles live to-day. There are still those, in 
goodly numbers, who put their sole trust in the Gospel of 
grace as taught by Scripture. That is to say, this article has 
stood ill spite of the Roman Emperor with his Thirty Years' 
War, the Spanish king with his Inquisition, the French king 
with his dragonades, the pope with his best thought, the 
Jesuits, and the modern man with his most advanced pres- 
entation of the old principle of human wisdom and human 
merit. The edict has gone forth from high heaven: Das 
Wort sie sollen lassen stahn. 



110 THE OPEN BIBLE. 

The Open Bible. 

Pbof. At.b. H. Milleb, Concordia Teachers' College, Oak Park, 111. 

"Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have 
eternal life: and they are they which testify of Me." So 
speaks Christ, John 5, 39. 

We are to search the Word of God, to study it diligently, 
to observe and to read with careful discrimination. God 
does not wish the Scriptures to be read irreverently, heed- 
lessly, carelessly. Eternal life is too serious a subject for 
frivolity or careless, idle fancy. Could any language be 
more plain than the command of Christ ? Can any one who 
makes any pretense of being a true Christian, who accepts 
the Bible as a lamp to guide his feet, and who believes that 
the Bible is the Word of God, doubt the efficacy of a "search 
of the Scriptures"? Must he not be wilfully blind who will 
not see the truth? Must he not be wilfully deaf who will 
not heed nor listen to the exhortations of his Maker, who 
says: "This Book of the Law shall not depart out of thy 
mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that 
thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written 
therein" (Joshua 1, 18) ? 

How great is our debt to the Reformation that it has 
enabled us to comply with God's command to "search the 
Scriptures"! How dreary is the lot of him who has no 
access to the Bible, to whom the Bible is sealed! And yet 
drearier is the lot of him who can read, and who might have 
access to the Holy Book, yet from whom the Holy Book is 
withheld, and who, therefore, cannot accept its testimony 
of Him who is eternal life! And who are they, even now, 
that endeavor to close this Book, which God has commanded 
us "to search"? Who are they that defy the Lord God 
Almighty, and set their word above His? Have pope, cardi- 
nals, and bishops forgotten the Lord's injunction, "For I, the 
Lord, thy God, am a jealous God," when they proclaim that 
the doctrine, "Search ye the Scriptures," is a blasphemous, 
destructive, and damned heresy, and therefore prohibit the 
reading of the Bible, and threaten all who disobey their 
injunctions with eternal damnation? Home of the twentieth 



THE OPEN BIBLE. Ill 

century is the Rome of the sixteenth century, and even to 
the present day teaches that the Church is an infallible 
expounder of the doctrines contained in the Bible, and that 
no one may understand and expound it "in contradiction 
to the sense which the mother Church has accepted and 
accepts," as is clearly asserted by the Council of Trent. 

Were it not for the Reformation, through which God 
opened His Book for him who will see, this Book would have 
remained closed to countless thousands. So immeasurably 
great is the blessing that it is above human understanding 
to comprehend it. For to us this open Bible is eternal life. 

In pre-Reformation times the Bible was closed and sealed 
not only to him who might have opened it, had he so desired, 
but to nearly all mankind. By the grace of God, Luther's 
great work in translating the Bible, in securing its distri- 
bution, and in expounding it, thus revealing God's will to 
save all, has borne thousandfold fruit. Why, however, must 
we ascribe the great work of the unsealing and of the opening 
of the Bible to Luther? Were there not Bibles before his 
time, and is not too much stress laid on his work, and too 
much credit given to him? True, the Bible existed before 
the sixteenth century, but it was accessible to but compara- 
tively few. Mathesius (1566) in speaking of the Bible 
previous to Luther's time says: "During my yDuth I saw 
a German Bible that was not German; it had evidently 
been translated from the Latin, but it was dark and gloomy, 
for at that time the educated men did not regard the Bible 
highly. My father had a German postil which contained 
the Gospels for the various Sundays, and in which some 
parts of the Old Testament were postilized and expounded." 
(Mathesius ; 13th sermon.) Dr. John Reuchlin ("Buch wider 
Pfefferkom") is authority for the fact that before Luther^s | 
translation appeared, there were no less than seventeen dif- f 
ferent German translations of the Bible in existence. These l- 
Bibles, however, were too strongly marked with dialectic 
peculiarities, and too much tinctured with Romish opinion 
and exposition to be accepted by any except those who were 
strongly biased in favor of the Romish doctrines. They 



112 THE OPEN BIBLE. 

also lacked scholarly precision, contained gross errors, and 
could, moreover, be obtained only at a high price. Before 
the invention of printing, the Bibles were transcribed by 
hand, and it took a rapid penman about ten months to write 
one copy. Such copies, as late as the fourteenth century, 
cost about $200 in our money, and it was not uncommon 
to pay a considerable sum to be allowed to read it for one 
hour a day. 

It is very evident that these various translations had not 
circulated very widely, and had not diffused among the people 
any familiar acquaintance with the contents of the sacred 
volume. Indeed, before the Reformation, the Bible existed 
not as a book for the laity, but for the hierarchy. The 
hierarchy wished to perpetuate its power, and conceived the 
idea of withholding the Book from the common people, so 
that these might not read it, and thus discover the fraud and 
deceit often practised upon them. The difficulties attendant 
upon a search of the Scriptures were thus greatly augmented. 
And while the common people were thus almost entirely 
excluded from becoming familiar with the teachings of the 
Bible, even as it then existed, with all the errors, the learned 
and educated also found difficulties when they attempted 
to interpret the original Greek and Hebrew texts. Few of 
Luther's contemporaries were sufficiently conversant with 
these languages to be able to read the texts intelligibly, and 
this was also true of the Latin ''Vulgate," which was, per- 
haps, the most generally known Bible of this time. The 
"Vulgate" (itself a Latin word meaning "^o make common 
or public") was not only difficult to read and to understand, 
but was grossly inaccurate, containing over fourteen hundred 
misleading errors. 

Luther^s mind was constantly occupied with a desire to 
remove the difficulty of access to the Holy Book. Ever since 
he had found the Bible chained to a wall while pursuing his 
studies at the University at Erfurt, he earnestly wished to 
make the truths he had discovered universally known. He 
felt it to be necessary to give to the high and the low of 
the Teutonic race access to the authority on which he based 



THE OPEN BIBLE. 113 

his doctrines. He wished to open up to then^i the sources 
from which he drew his inspiration. He wished to open to 
them the holy writings so that they might judge for them- 
selves whether they could be justified by faith alone, or 
whether the Romish doctrine of indulgences, etc., was to be 
their hope of salvation. 

He wished further to give to his people a Bible generally 
intelligible and scrupulously faithful to the original text. 
He wished intensely and earnestly to make himself compre- 
hended, and he felt that he could best do this by using the 
dialect which was the familiar, every-day speech of the 
largest part of the people of his native land. Hence, he felt 
that, if his Bible were to become really an open book to 
the masses, the phraseology to be adopted must come out 
of the living vocabulary which he heard employed around 
him in the street, the market, the field, and the workshop, 
and a diction must be formed out of the elements common 
to the speech of the whole Germanic race. Luther felt that 
only in this way could he write a translation which would 
be thoroughly idiomatic, and one which could even be under- 
stood by the children. How well he succeeded is now a mat- 
ter of history. 

Already during the year 1517, the memorable year of the 
Wittenberg Theses, Luther had busied himself in translating 
a part of the Holy Book. This translation embraced only 
the seven penitential Psalms (the 6th, the 32d, the 38th, 
the 51st, the 102d, the 130th, and the 143d). Between 1518 
and the appearance of the New Testament in 1522, Luther 
translated eleven different parts of the Bible. He would 
probably have continued in this desultory manner had not 
something occurred which completely changed his mode of 
life and his ordinary work. This was his seizure while on 
the way from Worms to Wittenberg and his subsequent 
removal to the Wartburg. Here at the Wartburg he remained 
from May 4th, 1521, to March 6th, 1522. The time he spent 
here in calm meditation was very propitious to the maturing 
of his plans for the promotion of the Reformation, and 

Four Hundred Years. g 



114 THE OPEN BIBLE. 

among them, perhaps one of the most important of all, the 
opening of the Holy Scriptures to the German people. 

Whilst at the Wartburg he visited Wittenberg, December, 
1521, and in Wittenberg he was urged by his friends to under- 
take a new translation of the Bible, and among these friends 
Melanehthon was the most insistent. After his return to 
the Wartburg, he immediately went to work. With few 
commentaries and without even consulting previous trans- 
lations of the Bible, until the first rough draft was finished, 
Luther worked so rapidly that in three months he had com- 
pleted the entire New Testament. Although the work was 
done with almost incredible rapidity, the language was so 
clear, so concise, so accurate and idiomatic, that even to 
this present day this work is an object of wonder to literary 
critics. In his New Testament he gave the German language 
a permanent literary form. His translation was not merely 
a rendering of the original text into another tongue, but his 
interpretation is so clear that it not only touches the under- 
standing, but also the heart. This was largely due to a life- 
time's preparation for the work. Every one who knows the 
history of Luther's activities knows how intensively he studied 
the Holy Scriptures, and how much consolation he found in 
them. He was thoroughly impregnated with the teachings of 
Christ, and so imbued with a zeal to secure his own salvation 
that he was ready at any time to stand or fall with the 
doctrines which he set forth, and which were based on 
Biblical truths. When standing before emperor, cardinals, 
bishops, princes, and nobles at the diet of Worms, he had 
written on the reading desk before him: "It is written!" 
No cajolery, no promise of reward, no threat could induce 
him to deny the truths of the Bible. And finally, when 
giving a straightforward answer to the strictures of the 
Romish authorities at Worms, saying, "Unless I be refuted 
by Scriptural testimonies or by clear argument . . ., I am* 
convinced by the passages of Scripture, and my conscience 
is bound in the Word of God. ... I cannot do otherwise. 
Here I stand. God help me!" he permitted no doubt to 
remain as to the firmness of his faith and his convictions. 



THE OPEN BIBLE. 115 

His was a giant intellect, and once having grasped the truth, 
and known it to be the truth, he was immovable. 

After a thorough revision of the text, Luther put his 
New Testament to press, and hastened the work of printing 
so greatly that the first edition of about 3,000 copies appeared 
during the latter part of September, 1522. So quickly was 
this edition exhausted that already in December of the same 
year a second edition was made necessary, and subsequent 
editions followed rapidly. Luther had opened the Book 
of Knowledge, and now all could read "that we are justified 
by faith alone." Persons in all ranks of life read with so 
great avidity that Cochlaeus, one of Luther's bitterest oppo- 
nents, recorded testimony "that even shoemakers and women 
became so absorbed in its study, that they were able to carry 
on discussions with Doctors of Theology." 

But the interests of the Catholic hierarchy were foreign 
to the open Bible, and measures were at once taken to sup- 
press the book. In Bavaria, Austria, and in Brandenburg 
the strictest means were employed to exclude it. Duke 
George forbade its sale in Saxony, and bought up all copies 
which were discovered in his territory. Yet Luther's work 
could not be prevented from circulating, and very soon copies 
were found in all parts of Glermany. The work was of God, 
and could not perish. Even Luther's enemies recognized 
the worth of his translation, for when the Catholic hierarchy 
commissioned Jerome Emser, a Catholic theologian, to pre- 
pare an approved Catholic translation to combat Luther's 
work, this learned gentleman simply copied Luther's New 
Testament, making only such changes as brought the 
Catholic translation into better conformity with the Latin 
Vulgate. In so doing, Emser showed his critical literary 
ability, as he evidently had discovered that Luther had done 
the work so well that it could not be improved upon. 

But it was Luther's intense desire to open the Old Testa- 
ment also to the German people, and already before the 
printed copies of the New Testament began to be circulated, 
he and his friends had begun the work of translating the 
Old Testament. He himself acknowledged that he was not 



118 THE OPEN BIBLE. 

tions of Tyndale's New Testament, about 18,000 copies, were 
printed and shipped to the various English ports. 

The relation of Tyndale's quarto edition to Luther's New 
Testament is very close. The order of the books, the arrange- 
ment of the text, the glosses on the outer margin, the 
references to parallel passages on the inner margin, the 
prologs, and many renderings in the text establish this 
relation beyond a doubt. 

"To any one," says Demaus, Tyndale's biographer, "who 
has enjoyed the opportunity of placing side by side the folio 
of Luther's German Testament printed in September, 1522, 
and Tyndale's quarto printed in September, 1525, the whole 
matter is clear at a glance. Tyndale's New Testament is 
Luther's in miniature; the general appearance of the pages 
is the same; the arrangement of the text is the same; and 
the appropriation of the margins, the inner one for parallel 
passages, and the outer for the glosses, is also the same. 
Of the whole number of ninety marginal glosses which occur 
in the fragment of Tyndale's quarto that has come down to 
us, fifty-two have been more or less literally taken from 
Luther." (Demaus, "Biography of William Tyndale," pp. 129. 
130.) And in commenting further upon the coincidence of 
the translations, Demaus says: "Nothing could show more 
strikingly than Tyndale's 'Prolog to the Epistle to the 
Romans' the great ascendancy which the great Reformer had 
now [1526] obtained over the mind of Tyndale. The 
'Introduction to the Romans' is, in truth, hardly an original 
work, but is much more correctly described as a translation 
or paraphrase of Luther's preface to the same epistle. 
Luther's work, originally in German, had been translated 
into Latin by Justus Jonas in 1523; and it is evident that 
Tyndale used both the German and Latin copies." (Demaus, 
I. c, p. 145.) 

Westcott in his "History of the English Bible" says of 
Luther's influence upon Tyndale's translation: "The extent 
to which Tyndale silently incorporated free or even verbal 
translations of passages from Luther's works in his own has 



THE OPEN BIBLE. 
I 



119 



escaped the notice of his editors. To define it accurately 
would be a work of very great labor. . . . Tyndale's ^Prolog' 
to his quarto Testament, his first known writing, almost at 
the beginning introduces a large fragment from Luther's 
preface to the New Testament. There is, indeed, a ring in 
the opening words which might have led any one familiar 
with Luther's style to suspect their real source." (Westcott, 
"History of the English Bible," p. 146.) 

In support of his contention the same author gives both 
Luther's and Tyndale's versions in parallel columns. 



Tyndale : 

"Euagelio is a greke worde, 
and signyfyth good, mery, glad 
and ioyfull tydinge,that maketh 
a mannes hert glad, and maketh 
hym synge, daunce and leepe 
for ioye. As when Davyd had 
kylled Golyath the geau.t cam 
glad tydinge vnto the iewes, 
that their fearfull and cruell 
enemy was slayne, and they 
delyvered cute of all daunger; 
for gladness were of, they sange, 
daimced, and were ioyfull." 
(Westcott, I. c, p. 146.) 



Luther : 

"Evangelion ist eyn grie- 
chisch wort vnd hevst auflf 
deutsch gute botschafft, gute 
meher, gutte new zeyttung, gut 
geschrey, davon man singet, sa- 
get und frolich ist. Gleich als 
do Dauid den grossen Goliath 
vberwand, kam ein gut geschrey 
vnd trostlich new zeyttig vnter 
das ludisch volck, das yhrer 
grewlicher feynd erschlagen, 
vnd se erloset, zu freud vnd 
frid gestellet weren, dauon sie 
sungen vnd sprungen vnd fro- 
lich waren." 



"The coincidences between Tyndale's Exposition of the 
Sermon on the Mount and that of Luther, though fewer, are 
even more worthy of notice. Luther's Expository Sermons 
were delivered in 1530, and printed in 1532, but they were 
not translated into Latin till 1533. On the other hand, Tyn- 
dale's Exposition was printed in 1532. He must then have 
used the German Edition of Luther, or, perhaps, even notes, 
taken by some friend or by himself. The coincidences, which 
are comparatively rare, are still verbal and at the same time 
tacit. The following example will be sufficient to indicate 
their character." (Westcott, ibid., p. 148.) 



120 THE OPEN BIBLE. 

f 

Tyndale : Luther : 

(Matt. 5, 4.) (Matth. 6, 4.) 

Righteousnes is not taken for Gerechtigkeit mus an diesem 

the principalle righteousnes of ort nicht heissen, die Christ- 

a christen ma, thorow which liche heubt gerechtigkeit, da- 

the parson is good and accepted durch die person frum vnd an- 

before God. For these VIII genem wird fur Grott. Denn ich 

poyntes are but doctryne of the habe vor gesagt, das diese acht 

frutes and workes of a chris- stuck nichts anders sind, denn 

ten mfi, before which the faythe eine lere von den friichten vnd 

must be there . . . SLd as a tre guten wercken eines Christen, 

out of which all soche frutes vor welchen der glaube zuvor 

ad workes must sprynge. mus da sein, als der bawm vnd 

. Wherfore vnderstande here heubstuck . . . daraus solche 

the outwarde righteousnes be- stuck alle wachsen vnd folgen 

fore the worlde and true and mussen. Darumb verstehe hie 

faythfuU dealynge eche with die eusserlich Grerechtigkeit fur 

other. . . . der welt, so wir vnter vns gegen 

ander hallten. . . . 



If we further compare Luther's and Tyndale's translations, 
we find striking similarities also in the texts of the various 
books, so that the unbiased observer is prone to acknowledge 
Tyndale's debt to Luther. 

Tyndale's translation formed the basis of all subsequent 
translations of the English Bible. Marsh, in commenting 
on the work of Tyndale, says : "Tyndale's, Coverdale's, Cran- 
mer's, the Bishops', the Genevan, and the Standard Version 
coincide so nearly with each other, both in sense and in 
phraseology, that we may hear whole chapters gf any of them 
read without noticing that they deviate from the text to 
which we have always been accustomed. When, then, we 
study our Testaments, we are in most cases perusing the 
identical words penned by the martyr Tyndale, nearly three 
hundred years ago." (Marsh, "Lecture on the English Lan- 
guage," p. 625.) 

And Froude, the historian, says: "Of Tjrndale's trans- 
lation itself, though since that time [1525] it has be^n many 
times revised and altered, we may say that it is substantially 
the Bible with which we are familiar. The peculiar genius — 



THE OPEN BIBLE. 121 

if such a word may be permitted — which breathes through 
it, the mingled tenderness and majesty, the Saxon simplicity, 
the preternatural grandeur, unequaled, unapproached, in the 
attempted improvement of modem scholars, — all are here, 
and bear the impress of the mind of one man, William Tyn- 
dale." ("History," Vol. Ill, p. 84.) Demaus, speaking upon 
the same point, says: "The most satisfactory demonstration 
that can be given of the superlative merit of Tyndale's work 
is the fact that the English New Testament, as we now have 
it, is, in its substance, the unchanged language of* Tyndale's 
first version. The English Bible has been subjected to re- 
peated revisions; the scholarship of generations, better pro- 
vided than Tyndale was with critical apparatus, has been 
brought to bear upon it; writers by no means overfriendly 
to the original translator have had it in their power to dis- 
parage and to displace his work: yet, in spite of all these 
influences, that Book, to which all Englishmen turn as the 
source, and the guide, and the stay of their spiritual life is 
substantially the translation of Tyndale." (p. 131.) 

It may thus be seen from the foregoing that the blessings 
of the Reformation spread in wide circles, and much blessing 
was bestowed upon England and English-speaking peoples 
through Tyndale's opening of the Bible. While Luther's 
influence was not so much directly felt in England through 
his own translation, indirectly his influence was strongly 
exerted upon the millions of readers of the English Bible 
through Tyndale's contact with the great Reformer. Tyn- 
dale, himself a man of great scholarly attainments, realized 
that Luther's was a master mind, and, therefore, was more 
than willing to accept Luther's assistance. And as Tyndale's 
translation forms the basis of all subsequent translations, 
we who realize the great blessings of the Reformation which 
the open Bible brought feel that Tyndale's contact with 
Luther gave to the English version much of that perspicuity, 
that correctness, and that orderly arrangement which we 
esteem so highly in the German translation. And though 
millions of English readers may never be willing to admit 
the hand and touch of Luther in the English Bible, it is 



122 THE OPEN BIBLE. 

but fitting that, in the enumeration of the great deeds of 
the great Reformer, and of the great blessings coming down 
to us through the open Bible, both the German as well as 
the English, we draw the attention of the whole world to 
these indisputable historical facts, and proclaim far and 
wide how much is due to this great man. 

And what did this open Bible do for the people? It 
showed them the way to salvation; it disclosed to them 
the false doctrines of the Romish religion; it taught them 
to reason 'and to weigh the decrees of pope find council, — 
it was to them light and salvation. What had been dark was 
illumined, and the Antichrist and his legions could not so 
easily deceive the common man. Lie could not be pro- 
claimed, for the Truth was at hand. 

In conclusion we cannot refrain from calling attention 
to the many and varied expositions which Luther wrote upon 
the books of the Bible to make clear to the most common of 
his people, as well as to the most learned men of his time, 
the exact meaning of the various texts. His denotative 
powers are clearly seen in his expositions of the^Books of 
Moses, of the Psalms, and of various other parts of the 
Bible. How diligently does he strive to make clear to his 
Germans the exact meaning of God's Law as expressed in 
the Ten Commandments! So well has he done the work 
that even the many great theologians who followed him were 
glad to accept his interpretations. He who possesses a com- 
plete set of Luther's works, possesses a well of knowledge 
which seems inexhaustible. He himself was a most exacting 
disciple of God's command "to search the Scriptures," and 
his work in making the Bible open to the millions who 
followed him, thus giving them an incentive to read, to 
study, to search for salvation's sake, to learn that the Scrip- 
tures testify of Him who is "eternal life," is one of the 
great blessings of the Reformation. 



LUTHER AND THE PEASANT WAR. 123 

Luther and the Peasant War. 

Rev. W. Schoenfeld, New York, N. Y. 

The Peasant War of 1525 was a politico-social revolt of 
national importance. As such it forms a subject of deep 
interest to the student of Germany's history, the more so 
because it was both the most powerful of many similar up- 
risings during the two preceding centuries and the last truly 
national movement till 1813. For the student of Luther, pe- 
culiar interest attaches to this greatest peasant war because of 
the charges made against the great Reformer with reference 
thereto. The Romanists insist that Luther and the Reforma- 
tion were the prime cause of this truly terrible upheaval. 
Likewise the very men who through their fundamentally 
different conception of Christian freedom became the chief 
fomentors of the war, together with Socialists and Com- 
munists of a later day, have accused Luther of deserting 
the cause of the common people, and of a cowardly failure 
to stand by the principles he himself had enunciated in their 
alleged logical and necessary application to the social and 
political life. 

The most comprehensive condemnation of Luther and the 
Reformation bearing on this point is made by Leo XIII. 
In his encyclical "Diuturnum," p. 25, he says : "Indeed, that 
so-called Reformation, whose leaders and abettors radically 
assailed the power of Church and State by new doctrines, 
was followed by sudden tumults and most audacious rebel- 
lions, chiefly in Germany, and that with so much fire and 
murder of domestic war that hardly a place free from turmoil 
and bloodshed was to be found. . . . From this heresy, in 
the last century, a falsely so-called philosophy took its origin, ( 
and what is known as modern law, and government by the j 
people, that boundless license which alone is considered J 
liberty by the masses. From these it has come to kindred 
pests, to Communism, Socialism, Nihilism, abominations 
ill-boding and well-nigh death-dealing to civil human 
society." 

Right here let it be noted that the Romanists persistently 



124 LUTHEB AND THE PEASANT WAB. 

refuse to take cognizance of the fundamental difference 
between Luther's teaching on the Gospel of Christ, the 
sphere and relation of Church and State, and that of the 
Puritans and Enthusiasts, who parted company with him 
and fought him and his teaching no less bitterly than did 
the papists. Assuredly the interest as to Luther's true 
relation to the Peasant War is only increased by the observa- 
tion that he is condemned alike by the Romanists and the 
Protestant sectarians, and by the Communists and Socialists 
and others of like ilk, declared by Leo XIII the product of 
the Reformation. 

Many violent insurrections, in which not only peasants 
were involved, preceded the war of 1525. For over a hundred 
years there had been a demand by all the estates for a reform 
of the Church in its head and members. For more than four 
centuries a conflict had been waging between the popes and 
the rulers of the Holy Roman Empire, due to the ever 
increasing usurpation by the popes of the rights and powers 
originally held by the emperors. Again, there was almost 
constant conflict between the princes and the emperor, the 
princes endeavoring to secure for themselves an ever larger 
degree of independent sovereignty. Again, the minor nobles 
fought against the increase of the power of the princes; the 
cities sought extension of their power and wealth in oppo- 
sition to the knights and at the expense of the peasants ; and 
the latter resisted as best they could the constant encroach- 
ments on their rights, liberties, and possessions by both 
the lords of the Church and of the State. Many and far- 
reaching changes affecting disastrously the economic and 
social status of the peasants had been wrought by manifold 
influences. 

Though Romanist historians, like Johannes Janssen, in 
his "History of the German People," have sought to prove 
that the conditions of the common man and especially of the 
vast majority of the agrarian population had experienced 
much improvement during the period before the Reformation, 
to which the Reformation gave a setback, yet must they 
admit that there was much cause for complaint, as by all 



LX7THEB AND THE PEASANT WAS. 12^ 

the estates against the corruption, greed, and tyranny of 
Rome, so by the peasants against unwarrantable oppression 
and excessive exactions by both the ecclesiastical and secular 
princes. Everybody, through the Church, sought an easy 
and luxurious living, and this at the expense of the common 
I)eople, who were almost wholly debarred from ecclesiastical 
offices. 

There is no denying the fact that the Reformation, as it 
progressed, caused an ever deeper ferment which entered 
into every phase of life. The freedom of the Christian, as 
proclaimed by Luther in opposition to Rome's tyranny over 
the soul and conscience of man, was not fully or rightly 
grasped, and for that very reason misapplied, and this by 
some of the men who were most zealous in preaching the 
new theology, as conceived by them. Little may we marvel, 
then, that many of the laity should have come to base purely 
social and political reformatory claims on the Gospel of 
Christ. 

The common mind is always inclined to go to extremes 
whenever by a mighty change old things are made to pass. 
Moreover, at such times ideas formerly absorbed, but which 
had been long dormant, are apt to revive. And if one would 
rightly gage the causes that produced the Peasant War, it 
is necessary' that he should acquaint himself with all the 
social and political conditions and changes, and still more 
with the religious reform movements, which antedated 
Luther and the war. 

Many were the sects that arose within the confines of the 
Holy Roman Church and the Holy Roman Empire before the 
Reformation. Practically all of these bore the same funda- 
mental character. None of them ever got rid of what con- 
stitutes Rome's essential difference from Lutheranism, its 
basic conception of Christ's Gospel, that is to say, they never 
conceived religion to be anything else than an order of life, 
by which man is to work out his own salvation. What they 
therefore aimed at was merely an improvement of the order 
of life, a truer interpretation and a more consistent appli- 
cation of what they so significantly called the evangelical 



126 LUTHEB AND THE PEASANT WAR. 

law or the law of Christ to all the phases of life in Church 
and State. Necessarily their every conception of freedom 
was limited to the external phases of life, called merely for 
a new social order, and meant nothing more than freedom 
of movement for the redeemed child of God within what was 
understood to be God's law and order. It was not freedom 
from the Law and sin's guilt and penalty, the freedom of the 
conscience before God by His grace through Christ's vica- 
rious obedience and suffering. 

Another important fact which may not be overlooked is 
that nearly all these sectarians and reformers, or heretics, 
as Rome called them, were affected by, and entangled in. 
Mysticism and Apocalypticism. The mystic seeks satis- 
faction for his soul by immediate communion with God. 
The end and aim of all religion for him is to seek perfection 
of happiness by losing his soul, completely in God, thus 
becoming, as it were, dead to all influences outside of God. 
To attain this glorious state is the one object to which he 
holds it his duty to direct all his energies. Carried to its 
logical end, mysticism leads to a complete identification of 
one's own spirit with that of God, to the rejection not only 
of all ecclesiastical authority and mediation, but of all 
mediation of God's grace by the Holy Ghost through any 
external means whatsoever. Though the Holy Scriptures 
are at first employed to furnish the proof for the actuality 
of personal communication with God, these are soon brushed 
aside as no longer needed, because of the alleged direct com- 
munication with the Spirit of God. 

No man appears to have exerted a mightier influence 
upon the sectarians of the Middle Ages than Joachim of 
Floris, and this by reason of his apocalyptical speculations. 
Significant, too, is the fact that this curious Calabrian prior, 
who died in the year 1201, published his writings at the 
urgent request of several popes. Notwithstanding this fact, 
his writings were employed as one of their chief weapons 
by the antagonists of papacy. A historical philosopher, he 
divided the history of the world into three periods. The 
first he defined as the period of servitude under the Law, 



LUTHER AND THE PEASANT WAB. 127 

the Second as that of childhood under the tutelage of the 
priesthood, the third was to be that of perfect liberty. In 
this period the perfect revelation was to come, and perfect 
life to be attained, and that was to be the life of the monks, 
no private possessions, no difference of caste or estate, no 
cares of labor. To reach these conclusions and secure for 
them divine basis and authority he used the Bible, inter- 
preting it allegorically. This method enabled him to put 
his own preconceived notions into the Bible, and at the same 
time paved the way for the abandonment of the Bible for 
a more advanced and direct revelation, such as was to 
come in his third period. The beginning of this period he 
saw in the origin of monasticism, the zenith he placed in 
the middle of the thirteenth century. Following the example 
of Joachim, others, by allegorical interpretation of the Bible, 
endeavored to make its statements and prophecies fit present- 
day conditions and show the way for the fulfilment of their 
heart's desires. Nor did they stop here, but adopting the 
idea of Joachim's third period, they proceeded to claim for 
themselves the prophetic gift, direct inspiration and reve- 
lation, and this in the interest of the very freedom foretold 
by Joachim to come in his third period. These vagaries not 
only gave birth to many sects, but continued to live and 
vegetate among the people, even after the sects, as organized 
boaies, were suppressed and disappeared. Throughout the 
Middle Ages we see them reappear here, there, and every- 
where. 

With these facts before our eyes, we may readily under- 
stand such phenomena as the preaching and doings of the 
Zwickau prophets and men of the type of Thomas Muenzer, 
who beyond a doubt was the prime f omentor of the Peasant 
War. Significant, too, is the fact that Muenzer's home and 
the province of his earliest activities is known to have been 
a nest of the thoughts and theories of one such sect, the 
Flagellants. 

Let us now briefly review the Peasant War. The first 
disturbances occurred in the Hapsburg countries along the 
upper Rhine in connection with an attempt by Duke Ulrich 



128 LUTHER AND THE PEASANT WAR. 

of Wuerttemberg, who had been exiled since 1519, to recover 
his land. Anabaptists, in part emissaries of Thomas Muenzer, 
appear to have been the prime agents in creating the com- 
motion. In the latter half of 1524 Muenzer himself loomed 
up in those regions, in Klettgau and Hegau, Switzerland and 
Alsace. Besides him a large number of itinerant preachers 
created ever more unrest. In the first quarter of the year 
1525 the famous "Twelve Articles of the Peasants" were 
composed in Upper Swabia. Their circulation through all 
Germany began with the beginning of March. For the 
justification of the demands made Scripture passages were 
adduced. Briefly stated, these were the demands made: — 

1. Freedom to elect their own pastors, who are to preach 
the Gospel without any human additions. 

2. The preachers to receive for their sustenance no more 
than the tithes; the residue of the church-income to be 
set aside that no taxes need in case of war be imposed 
on the poor. 

3. The lords as true and genuine Christians to release the 
peasants from serfdom, who for their part promise to live 
according to the Word of God and to give obedience to the 
government in all proper and Christian matters. 

4. The poor man to have the right to take for himself 
the fish of the lake, the beasts and birds of the forest. 

5. All wooded lands of which the secular or clerical lords 
had taken possession without payment therefor to revert to 
the communities. With respect to properties paid for, 
a peaceable settlement is to be made by mutual agreement. 

6 — 8. The peasants to be relieved from burdensome ex- 
actions, services, taxes, and fines. 

9. Judgments and penalties to be just, free from jealousy 
and partiality. 

10. Meadows and lands of right belonging to the com- 
munities to be returned to them. 

11. The widows and orphans no longer to be subjected to 
the death-tax. 

12. If any of these articles should be proved contrary to 



LX7THEB AND THE PEASANT WAB. 129 

the Word of God, these are to be canceled, but the right 
is reserved to set up others having the warrant of Holy Writ, 
Compared with similar articles of earlier dftys, these 
reveal a truly remarkable moderation, no doubt due to the 
beneficent influence of the Reformation. True to their pro- 
fession, the peasants at first showed themselves willing to 
confer with the lords to bring about an amicable settlement 
of their differences. And even after the fierce tumult had 
gotten under way and spread in many directions, a con- 
ference was held at Heilbronn, beginning with the 9th of 
May, in which representatives of various cities and men 
of considerable prominence met with a committee of peasants 
to draw up a program of imperial reform, and a most re- 
markable document it was which they compiled. It con- 
tained the following fourteen articles : — 

1. All clerics, high and low, shall be reformed and receive 
, proper sustenance, their properties to be diverted to the 

common welfare. 

2. All secular lords shall be reformed, in order that the 
poor may not be oppressed by tjiem beyond Christian free- 
dom; equal and quick administration of justice for the 
highest and the lowest. Princes and nobles shall protect 
the poor, and in consideration of an honest income conduct 
themselves in brotherly fashion. 

3. All cities and communities shall be reformed in com- 
pliance with Christian freedom according to divine and 
natural law; no ancient or modern human invention to be 
permitted. All ground-rents to be redeemable. 

4. No doctor of Roman law may be admitted to any court 
or a prince's council; only three doctors of imperial law 
to be permitted at each university, whose counsel may be 
sought when required. 

5. No cleric, high or low, may be a member of the imperial 
council, or employed as the counsel of other princes and 
communes; none shall hold secular office. 

6. All civil law heretofore in force within the empire to 
be 'abrogated; only divine and natural law to prevail, so 
that? the poor man may have like access to justice with the 

Four Hundred Years. 9 



130 LUTHEB AND THE PEASANT WAS. 

highest and richest. (Specific provisions were added as to 
the number, character, and composition of the courts, allow- 
ing representation to all the estates ^nd the right of appeal 
from one court to another.) 

7. All tolls to cease, except those for bridges and roads. 

8. All streets to be free, all excise abolished. 

9. No taxes outside of the imperial tax to be raised once 
every ten years. (Matt. 22.) 

10. Only one kind of coin for the whole Grerman nation. 

11. Universal uniformity of measures and weights. 

12. Curtailment of usury as practised by the large bank- 
ing concerns, who possess themselves of all the money, and 
fleece, as they will, the rich and poor. 

13. The freedom of the nobles from every ecclesiastical 
feudality. 

14. The abolition of all alliances of princes, lords, and 
cities ; protection and defense by the emperor only to prevail 
throughout the whole realm. 

This can hardly be called other than a sane program, 
but nearly four hundred years were to roll by before its 
main features were adopted. Unhappily radical forces gained 
the ascendancy with the peasants, and so it was that the 
revolt was not stopped, but like a mighty flood rolled onward, 
eastward into the Austrian Alps, westward into Alsace, 
thence down the Rhine into the Palatinate, northward into 
Wuerttemberg, Franconia and Thuringia. The lords of 
Southwest Germany formed the Swabian League, which 
for a time, but a short time only, prevented the outbreak of 
hostilities. By the end of March the flames of revolution 
broke forth everywhere. Castles and cloisters were despoiled 
and incinerated. Against the cities, too, the peasants 
marched, but largely for the purpose of winning them over 
to their side and making them points of support, bases of 
operation. Nor were the efforts of the peasants in this di- 
rection futile. At one time nearly all the cities of Franconia 
made common cause with them. Early in April the forces 
of the Swabian League, commanded by Georg Truchsess, 
of Waldenburg, met the peasants at Leipheim and scored 



LUTHER AND THE- PEASANT WAB. 131 

their first victory. Five hundred peasants were brutally 
executed. This only served to increase the wrath of the 
peasants, and y^hen, on the 16th of April, twelve days later, 
they successfully stormed Weinsberg, they retaliated by 
mercilessly murdering the Count of Helfenstein and his 
associates, despite the plea made by the count's wife, with 
a babe on her arms, to spare his life. The infuriated mobs 
became guilty of ever more vicious excesses and revolting 
brutalities. However, the victories gained by the peasants 
were short-lived. April 17th the revolt was brought to 
a close in upper Swabia by the Weingartner Treaty. Truch- 
sess with his forces then moved into Wuerttemberg and 
defeated the peasants at Boeblingen on May 12th. Then he 
marched his army into Franconia, where on May 28th his 
troops were joined by those of the Elector of the Palatinate 
and of Trier. On the 2nd of June a victory over the rebels 
was scored at Koenigshofen on the Tauber, and on June 4th 
at Wuerzburg. June 8th Wuerzburg surrendered, June 28th 
Rothenburg. Muenzer and his comrades had already met 
their fate at Frankenhausen on May 15th. Only in the 
Alpine countries did the insurrection last into the summer 
of 1526. Brutal was the punishment inflicted on the defeated 
peasants. The estimates as to the number of peasants killed 
in this war vary between 50,000 and 100,000. On the whole, 
the status of the peasants remained much the same as before 
the war. Where the war had waged hottest, some betterment 
was granted. Only in the Hapsburg countries were greater 
hardships imposed. 

Muenzer it was who, coming into the camp of the peasants 
at Muehlhausen, caused the breaking off of negotiations with 
the princes, whose forces were posted at Frankenhausen, and 
who had sought to reach by negotiation a peaceable adjust- 
ment. He promised the peasants victory and declared himself 
armed with the sword of Gideon. In a paroxysm of wildest 
frenzy he assured the poor deluded peasants miraculous aid, 
and bade them look to the heavens, where he pretended to 
discover either' in a rainbow or a halo around the sun a God- 
given pledge of victory. But the help from above did not 



132 LUTHEB AND THE PEASANT WAE. 

appear. The artillery of the princes wrought quick and 
irresistible destruction, and turned the battle into a mas- 
sacre. More than half of the rebels were slain. Muenzer 
made his escai)e, crept into a house and into bed. Foxlike 
he feigned sickness, but this did not prevent his being con- 
demned to death. And now that his wild dreams were 
exploded, he renounced his new religion, took the Sacrament 
in one kind, and died a Horn an Catholic! 

We have now reached the point where we shall examine 
into Luther's relation to this deplorable debacle, the Peasant 
War. Is it true that he through his teaching brought on this 
terrible war? or that, when put to the test through the 
outbreak of this war, he showed the white feather, went back 
on his own teaching, the principles evolved from the Gosi)el 
of Christ, deserted the cause of the common people and 
became the obsequious servitor of the princes? 

True it is that Muenzer and the other fanatics who stirred 
up this rebellion made common cause with Luther in his 
fight against Rome, and proclaimed themselves preachers of 
Christ's Gospel and prophets of the Lord God Most High. 
True it also is that they accused Luther and his loyal asso- 
ciates of cowardice, of being afraid to put their words into 
action, of being intent upon an easy life, and unwilling to 
follow what they proclaimed the law of Christ. Again it is 
true that the peasants proclaimed Luther, Melanchthon, and 
others their patrons, and no doubt honestly and sincerely 
believed their demands based upon the Gospel of Christ and 
that Christian freedom which Luther had brought to light, 
and finally declared themselves willing to have Luther sit 
in judgment on their articles. But what proof is there in 
all this to fix on Luther any guilt with respect to the peasant 
revolt ? 

Never a man has yet dared to say that Luther ever called 
upon the peasants to right the wrongs suffered by them by 
an appeal to arms. Nor has the man yet appeared who has 
undertaken to prove that Luther taught the freedom wrought 
by Christ for all mankind to be anything but a spiritual 
freedom, a freedom of the soul and conscience, neither to be 



LX7THEB AND THE PEASANT WAS. 133 

gained nor to be retained except by the Holy Spirit, operating 
through the divinely appointed means of grace, preeminently 
the Gospel of Christ. But such was not the conception of 
Christ's Gospel held and promulgated by Muenzer and his 
confreres, the men who incited the rising of the peasants. 
Impossible it is for any one to judge rightly Luther's relation 
to these men and the Peasant War, unless he have come to 
thoroughly understand the doctrine of the Christian freedom 
or of the justification of the sinner by faith alone, as held 
and promulgated by Luther. 

Long before the Peasant War did Luther clearly perceive 
a radical difference to exist between his own basic conception 
of the Gospel of Christ and that of these men. They were 
the cause of his leaving the Wartburg, and returning to 
Wittenberg despite the most earnest petition and protestation 
of the Elector Frederick. The reformation they craved was 
not primarily and fundamentally a reformation of the sin- 
ner's soul, a restoration of man to divine kinship, but the 
establishment merely of a new order of life. They had not 
passed through any such experience as Luther had, and 
the freedom wherewith Christ has made us free meant 
for them not the deliverance from the Law, and the guilt 
and penalty of sin, but deliverance merely from external 
conditions preventing the unhampered movement of man 
in accordance with the law of Christ. The Gospel of Christ 
was to them really nothing but a new law, calling for 
the social and political equality of all men. To put the 
Gospel of Christ into practise, therefore, meant, to their 
mind, nothing more than the removal of whatever was con- 
tradictory or a hindrance to such equality. And this they 
deemed it right to effect, if necessary, by force. 

Furthermore, these men, like the mystics and apocalyptics 
of an earlier day, interpreted the Bible allegorically, and thus 
injected into it their own preconceived material notions. 
Like their spiritual ancestors, they also proceeded to lift 
themselves up above the Scriptures, and, brushing the Bible 
aside, proclaimed themselves prophets enjoying direct inspi- 
ration and new revelations from God. Thus it came about 



134 LUTHEB AND THE PEASANT WAB. 

that Carlstadt, infected and carried away by this enthusiasm 
of the Zwickau prophets, not only connived at the refor- 
mation by force which they attempted at Wittenberg, but 
advocated the closing of all theological schools, and himself 
went to the bakers, weavers, and shoemakers, inquiring of 
them what the Holy Ghost had taught and revealed unto 
them. Why, said he, should the Holy Ghost not do now 
what He had done of old ? Why should He not to-day reveal 
divine truth and give right and deeper spiritual under- 
standing to the weaver and the peasant than to the learned 
man and theological professor, just as He had by direct 
inspiration given such knowledge to Christ's apostles? 

Over against these men Luther from the very beginning 
distinguished sharply between the spiritual freedom wrought 
for all the world by Christ and every form of social and 
political liberty and reform, and contended with all his 
energy against any confusion of the two. Thus, too, he took 
an uncompromising stand against the employment of any 
force for the advancement of Christian freedom or any 
Church reform, maintaining that i^ was only through the 
Holy Ghost that man could be converted to faith in Christ, 
and thus made to possess the freedom of Christ, and only 
as divine conviction was effected in man by the Holy Ghost 
through the Word of God could any genuine reform be 
effected in the Church. Let the Holy Spirit enlighten the 
masses, and all abuses, institutions and practises in conflict 
with the Gospel of Christ would be done away with by 
unanimous consent, in fact, drop off as dead leaves drop 
from a living tree. Again, he stoutly insisted that to the 
Word of God all are bound, the Word alone, and that in 
its natural sense. 

Though in his "Address to the Christian Nobility" Luther 
assailed all Roman oppression and abuse, he did it as a theo- 
logian. As such he had a right to do it, and this because the 
abuses attacked by him were, without exception, due to a cor- 
ruption of the conceptions of grace, Church, priesthood, and 
Church-polity. In all these he beheld a grave violation of 

clear command of God, which gives to civil government 



LUTHEK AND THE PEASANT WAR. 135 

only the power of the sword. It was this Rome denied, 
demanding for all the clergy exemption from the jurisdiction 
of the State, and usurping its power. How scrupulously 
Luther guarded agains^ all confusion of spiritual freedom 
with any external social and political freedom appears most 
clearly from his essay on "Secular Government" and the 
obedience we owe it. (1523.) In this essay he demands that, 
the Christian suffer patiently any abuse the government may 
make of its power, though neither approving thereof nor 
becoming a party thereto. And already in the admonition 
sent to Wittenberg from the Wartburg in 1521 he says: 
"I hold, and ever will hold, to the party which suffers 
violence, no matter how wrong it may be, and will oppose 
the party that causes tumult, however righteous its cause, 
and this because no tumult will pass off without the shedding 
of innocent blood and other harm." The reason for taking 
this position he defines to be that in this case the devil, 
by stirring up "temporal tumult," would seek to prevent the 
"spiritual tumult," and thus harm the evangelical cause. 
"But," he continues, "God willing, he shall not succeed. 
They that read and understand my teaching aright do not 
create tumult ; they have not learned it from me." 

Clearly as he perceived the fundamental difference 
between his own conception of Christ's Gospel and that of 
Muenzer and others of like type, so Luther also, from the 
very outset, clearly perceived that Muenzer's activities must 
lead to a revolution, and thereby cause the greatest possible 
harm to the cause of the pure Gospel, which he knew himself 
called by God to preach anew to mankind. That it was which 
he called "the Altstedt spirit." Muenzer, indeed, first called 
upon the princes to use their sword to prevent insurrection, 
and he certainly would have been well satisfied had he suc- 
ceeded in forcibly establishing the law of Christ through the 
sword of the princes. But failing in this, he unhesitatingly 
appealed to the sword of the peasants. 

Neither Luther nor his teaching may with any justice 
be charged with having provoked the revolt of the peasants. 
It was no fault of his that the peasants in their articles 



136 LUTHEB AND THE PEASANT WAB. 

mixed religious and social matters, proclaimed him their 
patrooi and made appeal to his teachings, falsely understood 
by them, and this largely, if not entirely, because of the 
teachings of men who, while they fought as he did against 
Rome, yet differed fundamentally with him in the con- 
ception of the gospel of Christian freedom, and on that 
score fought him with no less bitterness than did the 
Komanists. » 

The "Twelve Articles of the Peasants" Luther did not, 
on the whole, condemn as too radical. All questions arising 
;from articles 4 — 11, he urged, should be left to the jurists. 
These he considered debatable, and did not reprove the 
peasants for them. He protested against dragging the Chris- 
tian name into these matters, and declared that, with respect 
to these, the peasants should simply have appealed to divine 
and natural law. In the first three articles he found cause 
for severe rebuke. Though the peasants are right in de- 
manding freedom to elect their own pastors, he denied to 
them the right of demanding t;he disposition of the benefices, 
since these belong to the government. Thus, too, he declares 
the demand of the peasants with respect to the tithes to be 
sheer theft and robbery. His strongest protest is, however, 
entered against the endeavor to compel the government, by 
force, to accede to their demands. Taking his stand upon the 
teaching of the Bible on civil government, he saw the 
greatest crime in rising up against the government, and 
fought against having the conception of the divine estab- 
lishment and duty of civil government obscured by any con- 
flicting religious or moral considerations. Herein he took 

* 

a position fundamentally different both* from that of Rome 
and that traditionally received from Wyclif by the sec- 
tarians, according to which government had only a lease 
on the power entrusted to it, which terminated in and with 
the abuse of that power. It was for this reason Luther held 
that ,also social and political reforms must not be attempted 
by violence and rebellion, but by fearlessly holding up to the 
divinely constituted powers their duty according to divine 
and natural law. The Christian especially must prave his 



LX7THEB AND THE PEASANT WAS. 137 



t 



Christianity by being subject to the powers that be, suffering 
patiently any* wrong, rather than by violent resistance doing 
wrong, confident that the Lord, the Ruler over all, will hear 
his prayers, right all wrong in due se^on, and make all 
things serve for the good of His faithful children. • 

But the sorest point for Luther was that the peasants 
urged in behalf of their socio-political demands and their 
forcible enactment a conception of the Gospel wholly antago- 
nistic to its true contents and import. This, he rightly 
perceived, involved nothing less than the subversion of the 
very essence of Christianity, and for that reason the de- 
struction of that entire reformation for which he, by God's 
grace, had been permitted to labor. Jn their third article 
the peasants had based their demand for release from serf- 
dom on the freedom Christ had secured for all alike, the ) 
lowest and the highest, by the redemption through His blood. / 
To this plea Luther replied that Christian freedom has 
nothing to do with a man's social or political position in 
this world. Being a serf or slave as little prevents one 
from enjoying the spiritual freedom through faith in Christ 
as if one were an invalid or a prisoner. The peasants by 
this article would tui'n Christ's spiritual kingdom into 
a worldly, external kingdom, a thing which can never be 
endured. Worldly kingdoms cannot exist without disparity 
in persons, some being free, some bound, some lords, some 
subjects. But all alike have access to God's grace and Spirit 
and to the Christian freedom. Luther did not disapprove 
of the peasants endeavoring to protect themselves against 
any injustice and wrong contrary to nature. But if to Chris- 
tian law they appeal, they must be told that this enjoins 
patient endurance of injustice. N9 desire has he to uphold 
the government in any palpable and unbearable injustice, 
but he does insist that both parties to this quarrel have 
nothing to do with Christianity. Should violent insurrection ■ 
be inaugurated, then, in his conviction, the government 
must, in the performance of its Christian duty, use all the 
' power at its command to suppress such insurrection. True 
to this conviction, he unhesitatingly called- upon the govern- 



138 lutheb's mabbiage. 

ment to perform its duty, when the peasants, despite their 
professed willingness to submit to his judgment, failed to 
give ear to his admonition and protest. Moreover, over 
against every charge of cowardice it must be recorded that, 
at the risk of being himself murdered, he went into various 
disturbed localities, seeking to quiet the rebellious spirits. 
Also it must be recorded that where the preachers held to 
Luther's teaching of the Gospel quiet was maintained or 
quickly restored. Finally it must be said to Luther's ever- 
lasting honor that he never disowned responsibility in calling 
on the government to wield its sword for the suppression of 
the rebels. Frankly did he acknowledge that it was he who, 
through his exhortation to the princes, brought about the 
extinction of Muenzer and the rebellion incited by him. 

Right in his conception of the very essence of Chris- 
tianity, Luther was right in his stand over against Muenzer 
and all his confreres. With the deluded peasants we must 
deeply sympathize, especially because their lot might have 
been much improved, and that within a short time, if they 
had followed Luther instead of the self-made "heavenly 
prophets." But as for the preachers of mere social and 
political reform, to whom Christ's Gospel was only a new 
law, and a law to be enforced by force, we must say : Thanks 
be to God that their movement received, in and with the 
crushing of the Peasant War, its death-blow, and that Luther, 
over against them, proved himself a veritable Gibraltar of 
the true Christian faith and the true Christian freedom! 



Luther's Marriage. 

Rev. W. M. Gzamanske, Sheboygan, Wis. 

If Luther meant to be a true reformer of a corrupt 
Church, which invariably pictured marriage as an unholy, 
and even as an unclean state, it was almost necessary for him, 
who proclaimed the sanctity of matrimony according to the 
Scriptures, to back up his words by his own example. 

While he was in the Wartburg, Luther wrote a tract in 



LUTHER'S MARRIAGE. 139 

which he proved from the Bible that the Church of Rome 
is wrong, when she says, "It is unlawful for the clergy to 
marry." "Marriage is God's appointment," he said, "and 
therefore no man has a right to forbid it to any one." In 
consequence of this tract, there began an exodus from the 
convents, and many nuns, monks, and priests entered the 
state of matrimony. 

!Not far from Leipzig, on the road to Dresden, is the small 
city of Grimma, and, close by, the hamlet of Nimbschen, 
where, in a building now a farmhouse, there was a nunnery. 
In some way or other, a ray of the light that had dawned in 
Wittenberg pierced these encloistered walls. Luther's writ- 
ings convinced some of these nuns, who came from families 
of noble birth now reduced to poverty, that it was impossible 
for them to "serve God acceptably" in a nunnery. Their 
desire for freedom induced them to write to their parents, 
saying, "Our continuance in the cloister is incompatible 
with the salvation of our souls." With all humility they 
begged their parents to help them gain their liberty, prom- 
ising that they would gladly share the burdens and trials 
resulting from such an act. In much anxiety they waited 
for the reply ; it came, and saddened them yet more, because 
their parents refused to receive them. In the hour of their 
deep distress they turned to Luther for advice and help. We 
have no record of a personal letter having been addressed 
to Luther, but we do know that Luther heard about their 
predicament and intervened in their behalf. 

In Torgau lived two respectable citizens and friends of 
Luther, Leonhard Koppe and Wolf Tommitzsch. To them 
Luther entrusted the difficult task of freeing the nuns. On 
Easter eve, twelve young women made an opening in the 
clay wall of the cloister, and reached the covered wagons 
that were waiting for them. Of the number, three were 
received into their own homes. The remaining nine, unable 
to return home, since they came from the territory of that 
implacable foe of the Reformation, Duke George, were 
brought three days later, in covered herring barrels, as 
the chronicle of Torgau has it, to Luther at Wittenberg. 



140 lxttheb's mabsiaoe. 

4 

Luther recognized the fact that the Lord had thrown them 
upon him, and the charge was one which he could not 
refuse. But he, to whom they looked for the necessaries of 
life, being penniless, could not provide for them. All that 
he could do was to go around to the respectable families 
of Wijitenberg, and ask that these helpless maidens be tempo- 
rarily given shelter, until they could be placed in permanent 
homes. 

Then, to protect the good name of his wards, as well 
as his own, Luther wrote a long letter to Leonhard Koppe, 
commending him for having come to the relief of innocence 
in distress. In this letter, which was published, Luther 
writes: "You have done a new work that will be celebrated 
throughout the whole land. Many will stigmatize it as most 
disgraceful, but godly people will proclaim it as most praise- 
worthy. . . . Some will say that, since this was secretly 
planned, I am a robber. But I answer: Yea, a blessed 
robber, just as Christ was a robber, when, by His death. He 
led captivity captive." Then he publishes a list of the names 
"of these poor children" whom he had delivered from their 
prison: Magdalene Staupitz, Veronica Leschau, the sisters 
Lanita and Ave von Goltz, Katharina von Bora, Elizabeth 
von Kanitz, Katharina Zeschau, and the sisters, Ave and 
Margaretha von Schoenfeld. 

In writing to Spalatin, Luther calls the nine fugitive 
nuns "a sorry lot." ... "I pity them much, but most of all 
the others who are dying everywhere in such numbers in 
their cursed and impure celibacy. You ask what I shall do 
with them. Some of the families have already promised 
me to take them; for some I shall get husbands if I can." 
The three who remained longest at Wittenberg were Ave 
von Schoenfeld, her sister Margaretha, and Katharina von 
Bora. According to a remark which Luther made many 
years later, Ave von Schoenfeld was his favorite among the 
nine, and had he been in a situation to marry, she would 
have been his choice. But she and her sister having found . 
husbands, Katharina, whose father was now dead, was left 
alone. She had been taken into the house of the rich and 



lutheb's marriage. 141 

honorable Reichenbach, who at times held the office of burgo- 
master at Wittenberg. Here the girl lived about two years, 
during 'which time she learned housekeeping, and won for 
herself a highly creditable reputation in Wittenberg society. 
She was on intimate terms with the family of Lucas Cranach, 
the portrait painter, and meeting there the King of Denmark, 
received from him a ring as a token of his esteem. 

So little did Luther think of marrying Katharina von 
Bora that he reconmaended her ^s a wife to two of his 
friends; one of them did not wish to follow his advice, and 
Katharina herself refused the other, namely Dr. Glatz, pastor 
at Orlamuende. Her womanly instinct read his character 
better than Luther had, since, some years later. Dr. Glatz 
had to be deposed from the ministry. The idea of marrying 
a man who was so repugnant to her induced Katharina to 
go to Amsdorf, Luther's closest friend, and complain to him 
that Luther was trying to force her to marry against her 
will a man whom she would never think of in that relation. 
The case, she continued, would be very different, should 
either Luther or Amsdorf be proposed to her. It was the 
negative, not the positive side of her plea that Katharina 
was urging in her frank and open-hearted way. Had it 
been otherwise, Amsdorf would have been more hasty in 
conferring with Luther on the subject. But, for six months, 
Luther seems not to have heard of this remarkable statement. 

Meanwhile, Spalatin received a letter from a noble lady, 
Argula von Staufen, wife of the Bitter von Grumbach, both 
of whom were faithful friends of the Reformation. . This 
letter, in which Argula von Staufen expressed her surprise 
that Luther did not marry, was forwarded to Luther. In 
'replying to Spalatin, Luther said: "I am not surprised 
that folks gossip thus about me, as they gossip about many 
other things. But please thank the lady in my name, and 
tell her that I am in the hands of the Lord, as a creature 
whose heart He can change and rechange, destroy or revive, 
at any hour or moment; but as my heart has hitherto been, 
and is now, it will never come to pass that I shall take 
a wife. Not that I am insensible to the charms of married 



142 lutheb's mabbiage. 

life. I am neither wood nor stone; but my mind is averse 
to wedlock, because I daily expect death and the punishment 
of a heretic." This letter was dated November 30, 1524. 

In March, 1525, Luther wrote a very pathetic letter to 
Amsdorf, begging him, as hQ valued his friendship, to come 
at once to Wittenberg. It seems that Luther was no longer 
able to bear the loneliness of his bachelor life. For an entire 
year, Luther confesses that, when wearied with his day's 
work, he timibled at night into an unmade bed, mildewed 
with perspiration. Such habits were not only unnatural, 
but harmful to the health both of mind and body. The 
divine precept: "It is not good that man should be alone," 
must have often occurred to him in his loneliness and squalor. 

In spite of the fact that Luther preached, on the Second 
Sunday after Epiphany, on how one should seek a wife, and 
in what way the marriage estate should be entered, there is 
no trace that he had any special interest in procuring a wife 
for himself, until Amsdorf came to visit him in answer to 
Luther's urgent request. During his stay in Wittenberg, 
Amsdorf must have related to Luther what Katharina von 
Bora had said about her willingness to listen to a proposal, 
if it came from Luther or from himself. Since A^nsdorf 
had no inclination to marry either then or later, he most 
likely encouraged Luther to take Katharina as his helpmeet, 
and thus follow the advice he had given to others. 

On April 16, Luther started on his trip to Mansfeld to 
preach against the peasants' rising. His already half -formed 
purpose of taking the frank nun at her word was increased 
by his father, whom he saw at this time, and whose earnest 
wish and continual importunity determined the decision. 

His first announcement of his intentions is in a letter of 
May 4th, to the Chancellor of Duke Albert of Mansfeld, where 
he says, "Before I die, I hope to marry my Katie in spite of 
the devil." Luther's mind was evidently changing in regard 
to the opinion he formerly entertained toward Katharina. She 
had appeared to him as being proud and haughty. He now 
looked upon her in a more favorable light. She was not 
beautiful, as her existing portraits abundantly show, but 



lutheb's marbiage. 143 

her chastity and piety more than made up for the lack of 
a pretty face. 

Luther did not enter into matrimony unadvisedly or 
lightly, but reverently, discreetly, advisedly, soberly, and in 
the fear of God. When he thought of taking his Katie, he 
prayed earnestly to Grod, as he himself says, that Grod might 
grant him a godly wife, with whom, by the grace of the 
Holy Spirit, he might lead a godly life. But after Luther 
had asked the Lord to guide him in the choice of a pious 
helpmeet, and there seemed to be no valid reason for post- 
poning his marriage any longer, he acted with startling 
rapidity. Notwithstanding her confession to Amsdorf, 
Katharina herself was surprised when Luther took her at 
her word, and announced that she could have the alternative 
she had suggested. No friends were consulted ; no announce- 
ments were made; no opportunity for the spread of gossip 
was given. A protracted engagement was the last thing he 
desired.' Years later he remarked, "It is very dangerous to 
put off your wedding, for Satan gladly interferes and makes 
great trouble through evil talkers, slanderers, and friends 
of both parties. If I had not married quickly and secretly, 
and taken few into my confidence, every one would have done 
what he could to hinder me; for all my best friends cried, 
^ot this one, but another.' " 

Wittenberg was startled one morning by the information 
that, on the preceding evening (June 13th), its most promi- 
nent citizen had been married to this homeless refugee. As 
the news spread from house to house, the story ran that Luther 
had gone to the home of Philip Reichenbach, with his two 
colleagues, Bugenhagen and Justus Jonas, and with one 
of the professors in the law department of the university. 
Dr. Apel, and the painter Lucas Cranach and his wife, and 
that, before these witnesses, Bugenhagen, the pastor of the 
city church, pronounced Luther and Katharina man and wife. 

Two weeks later, June 27th, the public ceremony was 
solemnized with a church-service, followed in the evening 
by a wedding-feast, to which Luther's friends were invited. 
He wrote to them, saying that they were to "seal and ratify'* 



•V 



144 lutheb's mabbiaoe. * 

his marriage, and *^elp to pronounce the benediction." The 
most prominent and most highly gratified guests were 
. Luther's dear father and mother. Besides the Wittenberg 
professors, and the entire party who had been witnesses of 
the house ceremony, Amsdorf, von Dolzig, the elector's 
marshal, Ruehl, and two other officers from the court of the 
Count of Mansfeld were present. .Nor was Leonhard Koppe, 
to whom Katharina had owed her freedom; forgotten. 

Luther's marriage created a sensation. It amazed both 
friend and foe. Dr. Jerome Schurf, who had stood so ably 
by Luther at Worms, had prophesied that, in case the 
marriage would occur, all the world and the devils would 
lauglj, and Luther's work would come to naught. Not so 
thought Luther, who predicted that all the angels would 
laugh, while all devils would weep and rage. Even Melanch- 
thon lost his self-possession; for, in a letter to Camerarius 
on June 16th, he says: "You may perhaps be surprised that 
at this unhappy time, when all good gentlemen are suffering, 
Luther does not sympathize with them, but, as it seems, 
prefers a life of pleasure, and to lower his dignity, though 
Germany has now the greatest need of his wisdom and 
strength." He expects a wave of indighation which will 
do much damage to the evangelical cause. At the same time, 
he pronounces the marriage an entirely honorable one, and 
is confident that Luther will be able to survive the storm. 
Many other friends regretted that Luther had chosen Katie 
rather than some woman of wealth and position. The time, 
too, seemed inopportune. The Elector of Saxony had died 

4 

only a month before. The Peasants' War was not yet ended, 
and the whole country was in an uproar. In these circum- ' 
stances many felt as though the great Reformer's mind 
should have been full of things other than marriage. An old 
legend was current during the time of the Reformation that 
the Antichrist should be born of the union between a monk 
and a nun. Wheji Luther's marriage became known to his 
enemies, they boastingly said: "Now we may expect the 
coming of the Antichrist"; whereas the going of the Anti- 
christ was proceeding at an alarming rate of speed, so 



lutheb's marriage. 145 

alarming that the pope and his minions saw the handwriting 
on the wall, and tried to divert the attention of the world 
from their own wickedness by spreading slanderous tales 
about Luther and his bride. Ah, the renegade monk and 
the runaway nun! What a sinister light that union, con- 
trary to all ecclesiastical and civil law, threw upon the whole 
Reformation movement! Now it was clear what Luther 
had in mind. from the beginning! 

But Luther, as usual, was unmoved by the criticisms of 
his friends and the attacks of his foes. He never felt so con- 
fident he was right as when his enemies denounced him. 
He was glad that he had exposed the glaring contradiction, 
propounded by popery, that marriage is a sacrament, and 
yet not holy enough for priests and nuns to enter. He was 
glad that he had by his own example restored to its former 
place of honor the institution of matrimony. He was glad 
that he had the courage of his convictions to defy the 
opinions of men, and to take another step in his reformatory 
work which, for its boldness, may well be compared with 
his burning of the papal bull and his heroic stand at Worms. 
The people of his day were sadly in need of such an 
example of domestic life as Luther was able to give. "His 
marriage to Catharine von Bora, was, on the whole, as far 
as we can infer from his own confession and public appear- 
ances, a happy one," as the Catholic Encyclopedia admits. 
The following sayings of Luther give us a charming picture 
of his happy home life: "I would not change my Katie for 
Frdnce and Venice, because God has given her to me, and 
other women have worse faults, and she is true to me and 
a good mother to my children. If a husband always kept such 
things in mind, he v^ould easily conquer the temptation to 
discord which Satan sows between married people." "The 
greatest happiness is to have a wife to whom you can tnist 
your business. . . . Katie, you have a husband who loves 
you; many an empress is not so well off." "I am rich, God 
has given me my nun and three children: what care I if 
I am in debt, Katie pays the bills." 

Katharina was a woman of sound sense, shrewd and 
Four Hundred Years. 10 



146 lutheb's two exiles: wabtbubg and gobubo. 

energetic — the morning star of Wittenberg, as her husband 
called her with reference to her early rising. She super- 
intended a large and growing household with considerable 
business ability. She faithfully cared for her husband on 
the numerous occasions when he was ill, took a lively interest 
in his reformatory work, and helped to sweeten the cares 
and sorrows of the most beloved and the most hated 
man in Christendom. Born January 29, 1499, and married 
when she was twenty-six years old, she died December 20, 
1552, after having lived in holy wedlock for twenty years, 
and experienced seven bare years of widowhood during the 
calamities of the Smalcald War. In his last will and tes- 
tament, Luther refers to her as "a godly, faithful, upright 
wife, who has always shown herself worthy of all love and 
esteem,'' a tribute of which any woman might be proud. 



Luther's Two Exiles: Wartburg and 

Coburg. 

Rev. H. Fbincke, Monroe, Mich. 

High upon a 'lofty mountain peak in the Thuringian 
forest, overlooking Eisenach and a broad expanse of the sur- 
rounding country, lies the Wartburg, a fortified castle, at 
the time of Luther the property of Frederick the Wise, the 
Elector of Saxony, Luther's sovereign. This historic old 
castle had at one time been the abode of that beautiful martyr, 
St. Elizabeth, and the favorite gathering-place of Walter 
von der Vogelweide, Wolfram von Eschenbach, and other 
German poetical celebrities. It was now destined to become 
the temporary residence of a greater martyr and a greater 
German poet. For to this retreat Luther was brought secretly 
and forcibly by ^ve armed riders who intercepted him on 
his return to 'Wittenberg from the Diet of Worms. 

This seizure had been arranged by the Elector himself, 
with the connivance of Luther and his friends, for the 
purpose of removing Luther for a time from the scene of 

"<5tivities and out of the reach of his enemies. For be 



LUTHKB'S two EXILES: WABTBUBQ AND COBUBG. 147 

it remembered that Luther had been excommunicated by 
a special bull of the pope, and that Emperor Charles V of 
Germany, as an answer to Luther's courageous confession 
at the diet, had outlawed him. It was dangerous to take 
sides with Luther, the heretic and outlaw, yet Frederick the 
Wise was his firm friend and powerful protector, and the 
removal of Luther to the Wartburg was but one of the many 
marks of friendship and favor shown Luther by this noble 
sovereign. And in order to be able to affirm with a clear 
conscience his complete ignorance, in the event of his 
being asked for Luther's whereabouts, the elector refused 
to be made a party to the secret of Luther's residence at the 
Wartburg. Thus this wise prince avoided an open break 
with the emperor and with the Church while protecting 
Luther and furthering the cause of the Gospel. 

At the Wartburg Luther was known as Squire George, 
a state's prisoner. He let his beard grow, and also permitted 
the hair to grow over his pate. He carried a 'sword at his 
side and a gold chain around his neck as a token of noble 
lineage. A page attended him at the castle, and when he 
ventured forth he was accompanied by a groom, who acted 
both as a protector and as a guide. He also learned to bear 
himself as a knight by carrying his weapons correctly, and 
stroking his beard in a knightly way. 

Yet he could not put off the scholar. When on his rides 
in the neighborhood of the castle he entered a house, he would 
invariably reach for the books that happened to lie about, 
so that his companion felt himself obliged to warn him that 
such a procedure was not "knightly," because "jiding and 
writing" did not very well harmonize. Still worse, Luther 
usually carried a small book with him. 

Whenever he met some monks or priests, he would start 
a theological discussion and, among other things, ask them 
about Luther, thereby inducing his companion to hasten their 
departure, in order to avoid detection. 

He also kept up a secret intercourse with some Franciscan 
monks with whom he had become acquainted while attending 
school at Eisenach, and he even made a few secret visits to 
Eisenach. 



148 lutheb's two exiles: wabtbubo and oobubo. 

Besides making, these, little visits he would pick straw- 
berries or indulge in hunting, this "truly worthy occupation 
of idle men," as he termed it/ On his hunts he would give 
himself up to theological meditations. "The hares that were 
hunted" were to him emblems of "the believing souls chased 
by the hounds, the devil and his godless bishops and theo- 
logians." 

In spite of these physical exertions Luther's health was 
not the best. His host, the commandant of the castle, Hans 
von Berlepsch, with whom he was on the best of terms, and 
who was intelligent enough to carry on a conversation with 
Luther on religious topics, provided him with the best viands, 
which, however, did not agree with Luther, who had been 
accustomed to frugal monks' fare. In consequence he was 
troubled with constipation and impaired digestion. Pills 
sent him upon request by Spalatin, the court preacher of 
the Elector, soon cured him of these little ailments. 

Worse than these were the spiritual vexations which 
afflicted him. He ascribed these partly to Satan, partly to 
his flesh, and insisted that it was more difficult to wrestle 
against these powers of darkness than against that devil 
incarnate, evil man. He traced these vexations back to the 
loneliness of his abode, as well as to the neglect of his 
friends' intercession. We may well believe that the spooky 
and uncanny surroundings up in that lofty chamber, espe- 
cially during stormy weather, were conducive to such afflic- 
tions. Yet the tale that he threw his inkstand at the devil 
is a myth. 

The "idleness" enforced upon him by his retreat gave 
him an opportunity for increased activity along literary lines. 

He studied the Bible in both the Hebrew and Greek 
originals. He wrote an exposition of the 68th Psalm to 
be used for the celebration of Easter, Ascension Day, and 
Pentecost. He finished his exposition of the "Magnificat" 
for Prince John Frederick of Saxony, and continued his 
work on the Latin exposition of the Psalms, taking up the 
thread at the 22d Psalm. A discourse "On Confession, 
Whether the Pope Has the Power to Enjoin It" he dedicated 



LUTHER'S TWO EXILES: WABTBURG AND COBUBO. 149 

to his friend Franz von Sickingen, though it was intended 
for the common people. He also published a sermon on 
the Gospel for the 14th Sunday after Trinity, containing 
the account of the healing of the ten lepers. For his con- 
gregation at Wittenberg he wrote an exposition of the 37th 
Psalm. Besides these instructive and edifying writings he 
composed various works of a polemical nature, among others 
some "Annotations on the Bull of the Pope, entitled Bulla 
coena Domini," in which the pope condemns all old and new 
heresies. Adding Luther's name to the list of heretics after 
the names of Hus and Wyclif, the pope had caused this bull 
to be read on Maundy Thursday in all churches. So far as 
we know, this custom still prevails in the Catholic Church. 
Luther translated this bull into the German language, and 
published it with his notes as a- New Year's gift to the pope. 
He also addressed a sharp letter to Archbishop Albrecht of 
Mayence, who had again introduced the sale of indulgences 
in his diocese. 

But above all his enforced "leisure" was productive of 
two works, through which he has performed a service of 
inestimable value to the Church. We refer to his German 
Church Postil and to his translation of the New Testament. 

The Church Postil, which he began to publish while at 
the Wartburg, contains sermons on the Epistle- and Gospel- 
lessons for each Sunday. These sermons were not delivered 
as printed. They were intended primarily for pastors (former 
priests) who had no experience in the preaching of the 
Gospel. In an emergency they could read one of these 
sermons to their congregation. However, the laymen very 
soon got hold of the book and read it diligently to the great 
joy of Luther, who considered this book the best he had ever 
written. Yet he intended it merely as a "scaffold to the real 
building, the Word of God." 

To make this Word of God accessible to all, he translated 
the New Testament into the German language. And this 
is his greatest achievement during his stay at the Wartburg. 
There were indeed German translations of the New Testa- 
ment at hand. However, they were based on the Latin trans- 



150 LUTHEB'B two EXILES: WABTBUBO AND GOBUBa. 

lation of the Bible, the so-called Vulgate. Besides, the 
language left much to be desired. Luther translated from 
the original Greek, and he made the ai)08tles talk Qerman 
'like the mother at home, the children in the street, and the 
business man." In order to accomplish this, it was necessary 
for him to create a new language, the literary Grerman of 
to-day. Through his translation of the Bible Luther became 
the originator of the German language. By unanimous 
consent of classic Grerman writers, such as J. Grimm, 
H. Heine, D. Strauss, W. Wackemagel, G. Freytag, and 
others, Luther is the first and greatest new High-German 
classic. He outranks the greatest heroes of German literature 
because he is more popular and versatile. 

Li three months the great work was finished. In Sep- 
tember, 1522, Melchior Letter, of Wittenberg, printed the 
first edition on three presses. Lucas Cranach embellished it 
with excellent wood-cuts. The title read: "The New Testa- 
ment, German. Wittenberg." The first edition consisted 
of 6,000 copies. Price, about $6 in United States money. 

It is needless to state that during his stay at the Wart- 
burg Luther kept up a diligent correspondence with his 
friends at Wittenberg, notably with Spalatin, Melanchthon, 
Amsdorf, and Bugenhagen. He dated his letters from his 
"Patmos" or his "desert" or the "region of the air" or the 
"region of the birds." 

Through his friends he heard of various excesses com- 
mitted by some would-be reformers, such as Caristadt, 
Didymus, and Agricola. Priests who read mass had been 
chased out of the churches. The Lord's Supper was being 
administered under both kinds to any one who desired it, 
without preceding confession. Pictures in the church and 
cloister had been torn down and the side-altars removed. 
Schooling and the sciences were being condemned as un- 
necessary, and the direct influence of the Holy Spirit upon 
the unlearned was taught. The so-called Zwickau Prophets, 
Thomas Muenzer, Nikolaus Storch, and others, denied the 
necessity of reading the Bible, and rejected the ministry 
and infant baptism. 



LUTHER'S TWO EXILES: WABTBUEG AND COBUBG. 151 

The rumors of these disturbances induced Luther to go 
secretly to Wittenberg for the purpose of advising and 
exhorting his friends, who were in despair. After three days 
he returned just as secretly to the Wartburg. But when- 
matters grew worse, he could no longer contain himself* 
He left the "Wartburg for good, and suddenly appeared at 
Wittenberg, where he soon restored order, and resumed his 
important work as the Reformer of the Church. His stay 
at the Wartburg covered a period of ten months, from 
May 4, 1521, to March 3, 1522. 

Luther's detention at the Wartburg established three 
important truths. It taught him that the work of the Refor- 
mation was God's work and not his own nor that of any 
one man. In a letter written to his sovereign in justification 
of his leaving the Wartburg and returning to Wittenberg 
against the wishes of the Elector he gives expression to 
this thought in the following sentences: 'TTour Electoral 
Grace must know, or ought to take cognizance of the fact, 
that I have received my Gospel not through men, but solely 
from heaven." Again: "This matter cannot be helped or 
promoted with the sword. God alone must promote it, with- 
out any human assistance or concern." Thus Luther was 
encouraged to remain in true humility, and not have his head 
turned by his great victory at Worms. — It taught his friends 
and colaborers at Wittenberg that without Luther they were 
at sea and completely helpless. This knowledge prevented 
the spirit of jealousy from creeping into their hearts. 
History seldom presents the spectacle of so many learned 
and famous men working together in such perfect harmony 
as Luther and his colaborers. — It taught the Church and 
the world at large that Luther was the divinely appointed 
Reformer of the Church, who was under God's special care 
and protection. The hour for the liberation of the Church 
had struck, and all the power of popes and princes was 
unable to prevent God's designs. 

IS'ine years later, from April 23 to October 5, 1530, we 
find Luther at the Coburg, another fortified castle belonging 
to his sovereign. Elector John of Saxony, who had succeeded 



152 LUTHER'S TWO EXILES: WABTBUBO AND GOBUBO. 

his brother Frederick the Wise, deceased, in the electorate 
of Saxony. This prince favored the work of the Reformation 
in the same spirit of faithfulness and self-sacrifice as his 
noble brother. While, however, Luther and Frederick the 
Wise had never personally met, the intercourse between 
Elector John and Luther was frequent and intimate. Of 
all men these pious Electors of Saxony were, under God, the 
mainstay of Luther and his work. They were the instruments 
in the hands of God for the protection of his servant Luther 
and for the promotion of the cause of the pure Gospel. They 
conceived this to be their share of the great work in which 
Luther was engaged, and they cheerfully and devoutly lent 
themselves to it. 

What was the occasion of Luther's sojourn at the Coburg ? 
Emperor Charles V had issued a call for a diet to be held 
at Augsburg, in Bavaria, in April, 1530. The purpose was 
to "bring about a reconciliation of the dissenting parties in 
the Church, to heal the breach, to leave past errors to the 
Savior, to hear and to consider each one's opinion in charity 
and good will, to lead all to one Christian truth, and to do 
away with everything that had been erroneously said and 
done by both parties." 

The principal matter, then, to be settled by the diet was 
the status of the Protestants. And Luther being the mouth- 
piece and founder of the Protestant Church, its greatest 
exponent and most valiant defender, it was but natural that 
he should attend the diet and present the cause of the 
Protestants. But, alas I Luther was still under the anathema 
of the pope, and outlawed by the emperor. It was impossible 
to take him to the diet. His presence there would have 
been an affront to the emperor and to all the Catholic 
princes, not to mention the danger to his life and liberty 
if he had dared thus to defy the emperor. It was, therefore, 
the part of wisdom and discretion to keep Luther away from 
Augsburg, and yet near enough to be able to consult him- 
personally, if necessary. Coburg, a city in the vicinity, with 
its castle fort, was just such a safe retreat for Luther as 
was needed. It was near, and it was under the juris- 



LUTHER'S TWO EXILES: WARTBURQ AND COBURQ. 153 

diction of the Saxon sovereign. And the castle afforded him 
a pleasant residence during the sessions of the diet. 

But what a change in nine *years! What a contrast 
between Wartburg and Coburg, between Worms and Augs- 
burg! Then he stood alone, with but one single prince as 
his sponsor and protector. Now the cause that he espoused 
had gained a foothold in all Germany, and its numerous 
representatives and defenders were among the mightiest and 
noblest. "God help me!" had been the cry of Luther at 
Worms. And God had heard his fervent prayers, and had 
helped him beyond all expectations. 

Although Luther could not personally attend the sessions 
of the diet, he was the guiding genius of the forces at the 
diet that stood for purity of doctrine and holiness of life. 
Like a modem general who sits in perfect security behind 
the firing-line, receiving messages by telephone and telegraph, 
through couriers and aeroplanes, and thus gaining a clear 
insight into conditions on the field of battle, which enables 
him to dispose of his troops and batteries in such a way 
that victory is assured, so Luther from the Coburg marshaled 
his forces and smote the enemy. How helpless were his 
friends without him, how weak, how faint-hearted and de- 
jected! The sorriest of them all was Melanchthon, a good 
man and a learned one, well deserving of the title Magister 
Oermaniae, but vacillating, weak-kneed, wholly incapable of 
"trying the spirits whether they were of God," always ready 
and eager to compromise with the enemy, and to sacrifice 
important truths in order to appease the wrath of the 
opponents. It was true what Luther once wrote him : "What 
troubles you is your philosophy, not your theology." It was 
Luther who through his letters from the Coburg strengthened, 
advised, encouraged, reprimanded, warned, and thus, under 
God, led his friends to victory. For was not the reading 
of ^the Augsburg Confession a splendid victory? 

As an illustration of the sort of letters written by Luther 
to Melanchthon during this time we append the following: 
"I have received your Apology [the Augsburg Confession]*, 
and wonder why you ask what and how much we shall con- 



154 lutheb's two exiles: wabtbubo and gobubo. 

cede to the jJapists. Were the question this that the Elector 
is threatened with danger, I would grant that we might ask 
how far for his sake we might yield. As far as I am con- 
cerned, you have conceded more than enough in this Apology, 
and if they do not accept it, I cannot see where I could con- 
cede more, unless they adduce clearer arguments and passages 
of Holy Writ than I have so far seen. This matter occupies 
me day and night. I think, meditate, search, and run through 
the whole Scriptures, and my confidence in this our doctrine 
grows apace, and I wax more firm in my determination that, 
God willing, I shall allow nothing to be taken away from me, 
no matter how it turns out. — It did not at all please me to 
see you write that you had followed my leadership in this 
matter. In this cause I neither desire to be ^your leader nor 
even to be called such. I shall not tolerate that word, even 
though it may be explained more innocently. If this cause 
is not jointly and completely yours, I shall not permit it to 
be called mine, and yet have it saddled upon you. If it is 
my cause alone, I shall manage it myself. 

"In my last letter I hope I have comforted you not to 
death, but to new life. What else can I do? You worry 
because you cannot grasp the result and end of the cause 
with your hands. But if you could understand it, I would 
have nothing to do with it, much less would I be its leader. 
God has put it in a place which does not occur in your 
rhetoric and science, whose name is — Faith. All things 
that we cannot see nor feel are placed upon this (Heb. 11, 1). 
Whoever tries, as you do, to make these invisible things 
visible and tangible will receive trouble and tears as the 
reward of his labor. Thus it is with you. All our encourage- 
ment is lost on you. The Lord has said that He would dwell 
in the thick darkness (1 Kings 8, 11), and hath made dark- 
ness His secret place (Ps. 18, 12). Whosoever pleases may 
arrange it differently. Had Moses insisted on understanding 
how he would escape from the army of Pharaoh, Israel would 
still be in Egypt. May God increase your faith and ours! 
If we have Him, what can Satan and the whole world do 
to us? If we have no faith ourselves, why should we not 



LUTHEB'S two EXILES: WABTBUEQ AND GOBUBO. 155 

at least comfort ourselves with the faith of others? For 
most assuredly there are such as believe, even if we do not 
believe, — unless there be no Church on earth and Christ 
cease to be with us before the end of the world (Matt. 28, 20). 
For, prithee, if He is not with us, where in the world is He? 
If we are not the Church, or at least a part of the Church, 
where, then, is the Church? Or are the dukes of Bavaria, 
Ferdinand, the pope, the Turk, and their ilk the Church? 
If we have not the Word of God, who, then, has it ? If God 
be for us, who can be against us ? (Rom. 8, 31.) To be sure, 
we are sinners and ingrates, but that is no reason why He 
should be a liar. And even though we err in manifold ways, 
yet we cannot err in this sacred cause. But you do not listen 
to this, consequently Satan oppresses you and makes you ill. 
May Christ heal you! To this end I pray fervently and 
unceasingly. Amen." 

Luther knew, of course, that his cause was (rod's cause, 
and that God alone could save and promote the work of 
the Reformation. He therefore turned to God in prayer. 
Veit Dietrich, his amanuensis, records the fact that Luther 
prayed three hours daily, setting aside for prayer tho^e hours 
that were the most suitable for study. He heard him pray 
several times, and was overwhelmed with the power of his 
prayers. The results of his prayers were seen in Augsbui^. 
What Luther had asked in the secrecy of his closet God 
rewarded him openly. 

Prayer was the comfort in his sorrow. While in Coburg, 
he received the news of his father's death. Immediately he 
took his Book of Psalms, went into his study, and spent the 
day in praying and weeping. The next day the traces of 
his tears were still visible on his face. 

Luther occupied the whole castle of Coburg. All the keys 
were in his possession. A guard, consisting of thirty men, 
protected the castle and its inmates. In complete security 
and in the midst of the most pleasant surroundings he passed 
his time in prayer, meditation, and literary work. He was 
especially prolific in letter-writing. He wrote as many as 
six letters in one day. He humorously called the castle 



156 LUTHER'S TWO EXILES: WABTBUB6 AND CX)BUBO. 

"Grubok,'' the reverse of Koburg. Then again he called the 
Coburg hia Mount Sinai, but promised to turn it into Mount 
Zion, and to build three huts, one for the psalms, one for 
the prophets, and one for Aesopus. 

Luther was a brilliant letter-writer. We have read with 
delight his letter to Melanchthon printed above. He also 
wrote home. His wife sent him a picture of his little 
daughter Magdalena. It gladdened his heart, though it was 
very dark. A letter written to his "dear sonny Haenschen" 
is a literary gem. Another ' letter, written to Chancellor 
Brueck, to whose fortitude and optimism the Lutheran 
Church owed much, holds rank with the best ever written. 
Here it is : "I have written several times to my most gracious 
sovereign and to our friends, so that I almost think I have 
done too much writing, especially to my most gracious 
sovereign, as though I doubted that God's help and comfort 
were more and stronger with his Electoral Grace than with 
me. However, I have done so on account of our friends, 
some of whom are sorrowful and worried, as though God 
had forgotten us; while He cannot forget us, except He 
first forget Himself, — unless our cause is not His cause 
and our doctrine not His Word. Otherwise, if we are certain 
and do not doubt that it is His cause and Word, then our 
pi*ayers are certainly heard, and help is granted and ready, 
so that we may be helped. There can be no doubt about that. 
For He says: *Can a woman forget her sucking child, that 
she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? 
Yea, they may forget, yet will I not forget thee. Behold, 
I have graven thee upon the palms of My hand' (Is. 49, 15). 

"Recently I saw two miracles. The first is this : Looking 
out of the window, I beheld the stars in the sky and the 
whole beautiful dome of God, and yet no pillar upon which 
the Master had set such dome. Still the sky did not fall 
down, and the dome, too, is firm. Now there are some that 
seek such pillars, and would like to touch and grasp them. 
Not being able to do so, they struggle and tremble as though 
the sky would surely collapse, and that from no other reason 
than because they do not grasp nor see the pillars. If they 
could grasp them, the sky would be firm. 



LUTHEB'S TWO EXILES: WARTBUBO AND COBUBO. 157 

"The other is this : I saw great, thick clouds sail above us 
with such a load that they might have been compared to 
a great ocean; yet I saw no bottom upon which they rested 
nor a vat that held them ; still they did not fall upon us, but 
greeted us with a sour face and flew away. After they had 
passed, there shone forth both the floor and the roof that 
held them, the rainbow. That was indeed a weak, thin, little 
floor and roof, disappearing in the clouds, and more of 
a shadow shining through stained glass than a powerful 
bottom, so that one must needs despair on account of the 
bottom as well as on account of the weight of the water. 
Yet it was a fact that a shadow apparently so feeble bore 
the weight of the water and protected us. Still there are 
such as consider, estimate, and fear the thickness of the 
clouds and the heavy weight of the water more than those 
thin, narrow, and light shadows, because they would like to 
feel the power of such a shadow; if they cannot do that, 
they fear the cloud will create a deluge. 

"Thus must I jest with your Honor in a friendly way, 
and yet I do not write jestingly ; for it gave me especial joy 
when I heard how your Honor above all others maintains 
good courage and cheerfulness in this our trouble. This work 
that God has given us in His mercy He will bless through 
His Holy Spirit, and promote it, and provide ways and 
means to help us whenever and wherever it pleases Him, 
and not forget nor neglect us. They have not yet half suc- 
ceeded, these men of blood, nor are they all at home again, 
or wherever they would like to be. Our rainbow is weak, 
their clouds are powerful; but the final outcome will be in 
our favor. Your Honor will please pardon my prattle, and 
comfort Magister Philip and all the others. May Christ 
comfort and sustain our most gracious sovereign!" 

Such words could not fail to inspire Luther's friends with 
confidence and trust in God for a successful termination 
of their cause. 

Luther was a great lover of nature. The assembly of 
crows, jackdaws, and other birds in a grove under his window 
gave him occasion to write a letter to his boarders at home. 



158 lutheb's two exiles: wabtbubg A2n> oobubg. 

in which, in a humorons vein, he describes the diet of the 
birds. "They do not care for great palaces and halls. Their 
hall is arched with the beautiful broad sky, their floor is 
naught but a field wainscoted with nice green branches, and 



their walls are as wide as the world.** He could not find 
out, he said, what they had resolved to do. As far as he had 
understood their interpreter, however, they were about to 
engage in a great warfare against wheat, barley, oats, malt, 
and all kinds of grain and com, "and many a one will per- 
form great deeds and be made a knight." 

Those birds remind him of the sophists and papists with 
their preaching and writing, who are ever before him with 
their lovely voices and sermons, and he sees how useful they 
are in consuming everything on earth and croaking in return 
by way of pastime. 

Passing on to other literary work performed by him while 
at Castle Coburg, we mention the exi)osition of the first 
26 Psalms, which he dictated to Veit Dietrich, and the trans- 
lation of the Bible, which had advanced to the prophets. 

One of his most important writings bore the title: "Ex- 
hortation to the Clergy Assembled at the Diet of Augsburg." 
This discourse is really his Augsburg Confession. He ad- 
monishes the bishops to abolish all errors in doctrine, and not 
to hinder the spreading of the Gosi)el. The keynote sounded 
in this powerful address may be heard in the following 
sentence: "If I live, I shall be your pestilence; if I die, 
I will be your death." 

Melanchthon had finished a draft of the Augsburg Con- 
fession, which the Elector sent to Luther for his opinion. 
He read it carefully, and summed up his verdict in the 
following words: "I have read Magister Philip's Apology. 
I like it very much, and have nothing to amend or to change 
in it. Nor would such a thing be proper, since I cannot 
tread so lightly and softly. Christ, our Lord, grant that it 
may produce much good, as we hope and pray. Amen." 

This so-called Apology was subsequently read on June 26th 
at the Diet of Augsburg before the emperor, the sovereigns 
of the various states and the churchmen assembled, and since 



WITTENBEBO IN THE DAYS OF LUTHEB. 159 

then is known as the Augsburg Confession, the most precious 
jewel among the confessions of our dear Lutheran Church. 

Other writings composed at Coburg were: "Circular 
Letter an Translating and the Intercession of the Saints"; 
"Sermon on Sending the Children to School"; "A Recanta- 
tion of Purgatory" ; "Of the Keys" ; "Admonition Regarding 
the Sacrament of the Body and Blood of the Lord." 

Nor was the household at Coburg Castle forgotten or 
neglected. Luther preached regularly to them. On Michael- 
mas his subject was, "The Angels." On October 2, he 
preached on the raising of the young man at Nain. 

This was his last sermon at Coburg Castle. On October 5, 
he left for Wittenberg, arriving there about October 16. 
Was he satisfied? He had every reason to be thankful for 
what, by the gracious help of God, had been accomplished. 
The cause of the Reformation had gained prominence, sta- 
bility, and recognition. Neither Emperor Charles V nor 
the pope and their henchmen- could frustrate it. The time 
had come when the power of popery began to crumble slowly, 
but surely, while the Gospel of Jesus Christ, in all its sweet- 
ness and purity, gained the ascendancy, spreading comfort, 
faith, hope, knowledge, and freedom everywhere, until to-day 
it is the ruling power of the world. The reading of the 
Augsburg Confession paved the way for the Nuremberg Peace 
Treaty, which was signed on August 2, 1532, two years later, 
by the emperor, who, among ' other things, granted free 
exercise of worship to the Lutherans. 



Wittenberg in the Days of Luther. 

Rev. W. Koepchen, New York, N. Y. 

The history of this ancient and famous city, where 
Dr. Martin Luther spent the greater part of his life, and 
where Rome's huge engine of fraud and oppression, con- 
structed by grasping monks and perfidious priests, came 
to a sudden stop, dates back to the year 1180. Wittenberg 
was at that time a frontier fortress, erected for the protection 



160 WITTENBERG IN THE DAYS OF LUTHER. 

of the German settlers against the depredations of the sur- 
rounding remnants of the former Slavonic inhabitants. It 
received its name from the white sand hill upon which 
it stood. 

When, in 1486, Frederick III of Saxony became a member 
of the Electoral College, — the body of princes formerly 
entitled to choose the Emperor, — he made Wittenberg the 
capital of his northern territory, and began to beautify the 
town with a number of imposing buildings, including a castle, 
a church, a monastery, and a university. 

Luther's first visit to this city was in 1608. He came 
to lecture at the newly founded university, and at the same 
) time to enroll as a student of its theological department. 
Though his stay was only temporary, he freely expressed 
his surprise that a university should have been established 
in such an unpromising place, which was, in his opinion, 
on the very borders of civilization. The surrounding country 
was flat, its soil was poor and in strong contrast to the 
beautiful hills and fertile dales of Eisenach and the golden 
meadows of Erfurt. 

In the fall of the year 1511, Luther took up his per- 
manent residence in Wittenberg, and it is from this time 
that our description of the city dates. 

Wittenberg, in the days of Luther, was a fortified town, 
surrounded by a wall of earth and brick and a very wide and 
deep moat. The wall had a thickness of sixty feet, and 
was pierced by three gates. The Castle Gate was at the 
western end, the Elster Gate — leading to the suburb 
Elster — was at the eastern end, and the Elbe Gate was^at" 
The southern end of the town. This Elbe Gate was about 
fifteen minutes' walk from the bridge, which, at this point, 
spanned the river and connected Wittenberg with the 
countiy on the south banks of the Elbe. This bridge, erected 
by Elector Frederick in 1486, was 1,050 feet long and 33 feet 
wide. It was partly burned- by the Swedes in 1637. Teams 
and cattle crossing this bridge paid a small toll. For pedes- 
trians this tax amounted to three pfennigs per year, payable 
in three instalments. Merchants, clergy, and noblemen, how- 



WITTENBERG IN THE DAYS OF LUTHEB. 161 

ever, were exempt from these charges. Toll was also col- 
lected at Wittenberg from the various boats doing business 
on the broad and winding river Elbe. Fishing in the river 
was free to all, but the fish caught had first to be offered for 
sale to the bailiff of the castle. 

Wittenberg was not a small town as towns were classed 
at that time. It had within its walls some three thousand 
inhabitants. Mainz at that time numbered no more than 
six thousand, Dresden but ^ve thousand, and Meissen only- 
two thousand souls. According to the tax list of 1513, 
Wittenberg had 382 taxable buildings within the city limits. 
One hifndred and seventy-two of these were houses occupied 
by "brew-heirs" (hrauerhen), citizens who were permitted 
to brew beer in their homes; one hundred and eighty-four 
were small houses (huden), whose occupants (hudellinge) 
were not allowed the privilege of brewing beer; and twenty- 
six homes were outside the wall, but within the limits of 
the city. Besides paying a brew-tax of twenty groschen per 
year, each brewer had military duties, and was compelled 
to own a complete outfit of armor and weapons. Of the 
hudellinge and suburbanites only one out of four was ex- 
pected to own such an outfit. For its defense the town had 
in reserve one hundred sets of armor, cannons, guns, wagons 
with implements of war, provisions, and tents. 

The citizens were mostly farmers, artisans, and trades- 
men, and their homes were small buildings of wood and clay, 
thatched with straw. The streets were narrow and un- 
improved, and the many cows, pigs, geese, and chickens kept 
by the inhabitants only helped to make matters worse. The 
streets had names, e. g,, Kollegien-, Schlosz-, Buergermeister-, 
Juristenstrasse, but the houses were not numbered. No 
streets were lighted; people who were out after sundown 
carried lanterns. Two brooks. The Lazy and The Quick, and 
a number of public and private wells supplied the town with 
the necessary water. These wells and brooks were uncovered, 
and were, without doubt, instrumental in spreading the 
periodical visitations of the plague. For mutual protection 
against fire every citizen was compelled to provide himself 

Four Hundred Years. 1 1 



162 WITTENBEBO IN THE DAYS OF LUTHEB. 

with a pail, made of leather, an ax, and a ladder, and to 
keep a barrel filled with water next to his house. Augsburg 
was the first German city to use a fire-engine. That was in 
1518. Wittenberg saw no such fire-fighting apparatus during 
Luther's time, probably because there was only one fire worth 
mentioning during all those long years. There were no 
floods from the overflowing Elbe during Luther's time, such 
as occurred in 1432, and again in 1594, and in 1598, when 
the water was driven from four to six feet against the 
Elster Gate. 

The city of Wittenberg enjoyed many privileges. It had 
its own court, coined its own money, collected the fees for 
the stands of the public markets held three times each year, 
and was nearly entirely independent from the jurisdiction 
of the castle bailiff. It owned several villages and their 
incomes, and had the exclusive control of the wine-trade 
within the city walls. 

The pride of Wittenberg, however, and a source of great 
revenue for its citizens, was its university, the Collegium 
Fridericianum, opened October 18, 1502, with 416 eniolled 
students. This school of learning, which, under the guidance 
of the Lord, became the spiritual heart of Germany, owed 
its inception to Emperor Maximilian I. At the Diet of 
Worms in 1495, he suggested to the princes that they found 
universities within their provinces to provide higher edu- 
cation for their subjects. This suggestion met with the 
enthusiastic approval of the cultured and liberal elector, 
Frederick of Saxony. Among the reasons given why Witten- 
berg was selected as the site for the proposed high school 
was the hint of the emperor that the people of Wittenberg 
and vicinity were in sore need of an education such as would 
be supplied by the proposed high school. And this was 
indeed the case. There was an appalling ignorance among 
the citizens of this border-town. Very few could write 
their names, and they would sign necessary documents by 
making their sign marfual. One solitary school, rather small 
in size and primitive in its equipment, supplied the required 
instruction for the boys. Its teacher, George Mohr, was of 



WITTENBEBG IN THE DAYS OF LUTHEB. 163 

a very erratic temperament. When the radical and impetuous 
Carlstadt had his first brainstorm, in 1522, and began to de- 
nounce education, Mohr closed his school, and advised the 
people not to send their children. The building, located on the 
south side of the cemetery at the parish church (Stadtkirche), 
was thereupon used as a bakery. It was reopened in 1523 | 
with a new teacher, but another twenty years passed before 
the city erected a larger and more up-to-date building. The 
girls received instruction at the parsonage by one of the ( 
parish priests. 

Although the university owed its charter to the emperor, 
and not to the pope, it was a truly denominational college 
of the sixteenth century. Its professors were obliged to take 
the common oath, that they would teach nothing contrary 
to the established doctrines of the Church, and Frederick 
had, therefore, no difficulty in obtaining from the Cardinal- 
Legate to Germany, Raymundus, consent and blessing for 
his institution. The careful elector, however, applied directly 
to the pope, and received, on June 20, 1507, from Julius II 
a special bull, sanctioning Raymundus's act, and granting 
to the University of Wittenberg all the privileges and ad- 
vantages enjoyed by the most ancient schools of Europe. 
This gaining of the pope's confirmation of the charter of 
Wittenberg University was a very wise and shrewd after- 
thought of the cautious elector, for as late as 1533 it hap- 
pened that in Vienna they refused recognition to a Witten- 
berg Doctor because that university had been founded without 
the pope's authority. 

As long as the university was in a formative state, from 
1502 — 1507, and its revenues too limited for the support of 
a better-equipped corps of instructors, the chapter-house of 
the Castle Church and the Augustinian cloister at the Elster 
Gate supplied most of the teachers. The department of 
Theology had four professorships. Three of these were filled 
by members of the above-named chapter-house and the fourth 
by John von Staupitz from the cloister. Staupitz was a man 
of high scholarly attainments, and since 1503 vicar-general 
of the Augustinian order in Saxony. As one of Frederick's 



164 WITTENBEB6 IN THE DAYS OF LUTHEB. 

chief advisers in the founding of the university and as dean 

of the theological faculty he not only called eminent scholars 

to important chairs, hut provided for the training of future 

professors hy appointing the most promising young scholars 

among the Augustinians under his jurisdiction as instructors. 

) In November, 1508, seven such monks were sent by him to 

. Wittenberg, where, although engaged in university work, 

' they were to reside at the Augus^finian monastery, and devote 

, a large portion of their time to study. 

In the department of Law, which comprised five pro- 
fessorships, we find besides the noted Italian jurist, Peter 
of Ravenna, four teachers from the chapter-house. Among 
these was the punctilious and cautious ecclesiastical lawyer, 
Jerome Schurf , who was Luther's adviser at the Diet of 
Worms, and since 1509 Henning Goeden, the monarch among 
the jurists of his time. 

The department of Medicine had three professorships. 
Its firgt dean was the elector's physician, Martin PoUich, 
who had performed an important part in founding this 
university. The elector made him the first rector of the 
institution. 

The department of Philosophy was comprised of the fol- 
lowing ten professorships: Oratory, Poetry, Greek, Hebrew 
and other Oriental languages. Logic and Metaphysics, 
Physics, lower and higher Mathematics, Practical Philosophy 
and History. Among this faculty we find the most stimu- 
lating of Luther's Erfurt professors, the scholastic philoso- 
pher Jodocus Trutvetter, and the remaining ^ve of the 
twelve prelates of the chapter-house. * 

The different departments had their patron saints, whose 

days were celebrated with masses in the Castle Church. In 

honor of the Virgin Mary, the true patroness of the studies, 

Saturday was free from the duty of attending lectures. 

V Wittenberg University was the first European institution 

I to teach the three ancient languages: Hebrew, Greek, and 

. Latin. The first professor of Greek was Melanchthon, who 

arrived in Wittenberg in 1518. A professor of Hebrew was 

secured from Louvain in 1519, but proved unsatisfactory. 



WITTENBERG IN THE DAYS OF LUTHER. 165 

and his place was then taken by Aurogallus, who became 
a most valuable help to Luther in the translation of the Old 
Testament. 

The buildings necessary to carry on the university work 
were erected by the elector. They contained lecture-halls 
and lodging-rooms for the students. The basement of the 
large building on College Street (Kollegienstrasse) was given 
up for sports and purposes of recreation, such as playing 
billiards, chess, etc. The price asked for board and lodging 
was very reasonable, and students were assured that they 
could get along with eight gulden per year. One gulden at 
that time was equal to 21 groschen; 1 groschen equaled 
9 pfennige; 1 pfennig equaled 2 heller. As the number of 
students increased, many found lodging with the families 
of the professors and other citizens. 

From the year 1602 until 1607, the total expense of the 
university was paid by the elector. But the project proved 
too expensive for the resources of this most liberal prince. 
After its return from Herzberg, whither it had removed 
during the plague in 1606, Frederick placed the Castle Church 
and all its revenues at the disposal of his university, thereby 
assuring it a regular income of money, meat, hay, grain, 
poultry, and eggs. 

May 1, 1607, the cultured and refined jurist, Christopher 
Scheurl, was elected rector of the university. His ener- 
getic administration contributed much toward increasing 
the number of students, which had dwindled from 416 in 
1502 to 112 in 1607. He was a strict disciplinarian, and 
insisted on faithful study. The number of instructors and 
lecturers in 1607 rose to thirty-eight. 

The elector ruled the university by a Board of Super- 
visors (Quatuor Studii Ceneralis Reformatores), consisting 
of four members of the faculties. They were responsible 
to the elector. The deans of the different faculties were 
responsible to this board for the promptness and efficiency 
of the teachers in their departments. 

The citizens of Wittenberg took great pride in this 
institution of learning, so unexpectedly placed into their 



166 WITTENBEBQ IN THE DAYS OF LUTHEB. 

town, and showed their loyalty by sending to the opening 
term, October 18, 1602, more than forty students from their 
town, the monks not included. 'No doubt, they made a con- 
certed effort and sent some who were not prepared to enter 
such a school of advanced learning; but they sent them and 
helped swell the list of immatriculations. Even in 1507, 
when Scheurl was rector, the university had upon its list 
^YB Wittenberg boys under fourteen years of age. The first 

' rector, Martin Pollich, owner of the "Apotheke," i, e,, the 
drug and general merchandise store of the town, was a citizen 
of Wittenberg. He was succeeded by two other citizens: 
Bartholomew Kranapoll, who was rector during the second 
semester, and his brother John, who held this office during 
the third semester. The rector of the university was elected 
every six months,, on the first of May and on the eighteenth 
of October. A number of Wittenberg professors married 
the daughters of Wittenberg families, e. g., Melanchthon, 
Augustine Schurff, and Sebald Muensterer, the latter of 
whom married a sister of Jerome Krappe, a tailor, and 
from 1524 to 1526 burgomaster of the town. 

With but one exception, in July, 1520, there were no 

^misunderstandings between citizens and students during 
Luther's time. Boys will be boys, even if they understand 
Greek to a certain depth and Hebrew to a certain speed. 
Individual citizens were at times annoyed by petty tricks 
and boisterous behavior of some of the students, but in 
general there existed an all-around good feeling. The small 
town offered too little diversion for the boys to disport them- 
selves as at other institutions in larger cities, and the uni- 
versity insisted upon good behavior and earnest work. 
Hazing was, nevertheless, carried on, and* the students, 
according to a custom of that time, carried weapons. This 
proved fatal in 1512, when Rector Erbar was assassinated by 
a drunken student, Balthasar. This unfortunate young man 
was captured, and publicly executed on the market-place 
in Wittenberg. 

Luther's residence in Wittenberg was the Augustinian 

cloister, near the Elster Gate. The Augustinians are said 

i 



WITTENBEBQ IN THE DAYS OF LUTHER. 167 

• 

to have had a convent in Wittenberg since 1365. Their 
buildings, however, had become so time-worn that Frederick, 
who expected to obtain many of his professors from the 
inmates of this cloister, resolved to renew them, and began 
with rebuilding the dormitory, which was finished^ by 1504. 
This "Black Cloister," as it was called by the inhabitants 
of Wittenberg, was \a handsome three-story and attic brick 
building, with ample room to accommodate as many as forty \ 
monks at one time. It was on the main thoroughfare, named 
College Street, from which it was separated by a lawn, the 
former cemetery of the monks. This lawn was enclosed by 
a. brick wall, and contained a number of trees, among these 
the famous pear-tree, under which Luther pleaded with 
Staupitz to be excused from the promotion to the degree of 
Doctor of Theology and its responsibilities. The chapel of 
the monastery was torn down in 1542, and its material used 
for the strengthening of the city walls. 

When the former monks had all renounced monasticism 
and left, the elector made Luther a present of the building, 
including the court in front and the gardens in the rear. 
This gift was legally confirmed by Frederick's brother and 
successor, John, in 1526. Luther undertook extensive altera- 
tions to adapt the building to his convenience, including the I 
equipment of a bathroom with tubs. Wittenberg, in Luther's i 
time, had many public and private baths, for the people 
preferred warm to cold baths. Swimming in the near-by 
Elbe was discouraged and forbidden. 

Luther's house was the center of very active social life, 
and at times very unrestful. Colleagues and neighbors were 
frequently with him. Out-of-town guests were numerous, 
and his hospitality to all comers was generous and abundant. 
Luther's household expenses were very great. His almost 
reckless hospitality would have bankrupted him, had it not 
been for the enormous energy and ceaseless activity of his 
wife. She was an early riser, and, like other women of her 
time, cultivated her fields, raised vegetables, kept cattle, 
swine, and fowl, brewed beer, and had her own fish-pond. 
For these things Luther had neither time, aptitude, nor 
inclination. 



168 WITTENBERG IN THE DAYS OF LUTHEB. 

When the Black Cloister was erected, the old hospital, 
which formerly occupied this site, was torn down. In 1516, 
the city erected a new hospital, just outside the Elster Gate. 
It was near this hospital that Luther, on December 10, 1520, 
broke pennanently with the Roman Church, and gave dra- 
matic expression to his renunciation of the pope's authority 
by publicly burning the Canon Law, and the bull of excom- 
munication issued against him. 

Outside the Elster Gate was the cemetery, more than two 
hundred years old at the time when Luther's daughter Eliza- 
beth was there put to rest. 
I Besides the Augustinians, the Franciscans had a monas- 
/ tery and a chapel in Wittenberg. Though very old and rather 
dilapidated, it served such professors at the university as 
belonged to this order as a home. When the monks had all 
left, Luther asked the Elector John, in 1527, to use the 
buildings as a hospice for the poor and suffering. In 1644, 
the elector turned the convent church into a granary, but 
the cloister remained a home for the poor. This convent 
stood in the Juristenstrasse. It was destroyed by fire during 
the Seven Years' War, and was never rebuilt. 

Xuther's colleague Melanchthon also owned his own house 
on College Street, which is preserved in its original form. 
It was assessed at one hundred gulden. His taxes amounted 
to seven groschen and six pfennige. Luther's tailor, Kunz 
Elrug, paid the same amount of taxes. Melanchthon and 
Luther received an unusually large salary for university 
professors of the day, but their unbounded and often abused 
hospitality kept them in pinching circumstances the greater 
part of their lives. Their families were on most intimate 
terms, and Melanchthon not only immensely enhanced the 
fame of the imiversity, but also proved himself a most effi- 
cient aid to Luther and his great work. Melanchthon did 
more than any other man to reform the educational system 
of the country. 

By urgent request of the town council of Wittenberg, 
Luther became an assistant in the parish church in 1514. 
Nicolaus Fabri de Grueneberg was parish priest from 1508 



WITTENBERG IN THE DAYS OF LUTHER. 169 

to 1515. He was followed by Simon Heinsius, who remained 
until 1523, and then came John Bugenhagen, whose services 
became most valuable in the sphere of church organization. 

This parish or city church stood in the middle of the 
town, and is still a conspicuous landmark. It was dedicated 
to the Virgin Mary, and its oldest portions date back to 
the year 1300. The edifice, surmounted by double towers, 
is large and massive, but without any architectural pre- 
tensions. It was incorporated with the Castle Church in 
1507. The interior is commodious and well adapted to 
Lutheran worship, which was instituted there in 1522. Its 
large bell weighs more than five tons and was cast in 1499. 
Near the altar is the memorial tablet of Kector Erbar, who 
was murdered by a student. 

As preacher of St. Mary's Church Luther soon became | 
the most powerful influence for righteousness in the city. 
He knew something of the shams and falsities that pre- 
vailed, and fearlessly assailed them in his lectures and 
sermons. The moral condition of the city also left much to 
be desired. The citizens had not yet adjusted themselves 
to the new situation arising from the presence of hundreds 
of young and often unruly men in the formerly so quiet 
little place, and found themselves helpless before the growing 
demoralization. Luther soon became familiar with existing 
conditions, and called upon the university and city authori- 
ties to take the matter actively in hand. He preached 
against astrology, witchcraft, saint-worship, religious pil- 
grimages, omens, signs, and charms, the poular beliefs of 
his time and town, and thereby brought about a great im- 
provement. What at first was only a temporary expedient 
became a fixed arrangement, when, in 1515, he received from j 
the town council a regular call to supply appointments in 
the church to all who were otherwise unprovided for. His 
sermons were preached in the German language. For this 
parish work he received no compensation, but the city council 
often sent presents of food and clothing to the busy pro- 
fessor's home. 

Next to St. Mary's Church stood the parsonage. The 



170 WITTENBERG IN THE DAYS OF LUTHER. 

building, however, was so poor that Bugenhagen, who became 
pastor of the Stadtkirche in 1523, bought a house of his 
own in the Neustrasse, and probably lived there the greater 
part of his life. The parsonage was repaired in 1605, and 
renewed in 1731, and is now called Bugenhagen-House after 
this first Lutheran pastor of the city church. 

Christian Doerink, the goldsmith of the town and father- 
in-law of Luther's colleague, the noted jurist Schneidewein, 
was treasurer of the parish church, and paid Bugenhagen's 
salary semiannually. The salary was two hundred gulden 
per year in money, presents from the city council, and 
refreshments from the Ratskeller under the City Hall. It 
was this Christian Doerink who supplied the new wagon and 
the three horses that brought Luther to Worms and back to 
Eisenach, receiving payment for wagon and horses for seven 
weeks from the city treasurer at Wittenberg. At the shop 
of this goldsmith Luther, Melanchthon, and other professors 
pawned their silver and gold cups when in urgent need of 
ready money. 

Adjoining the city church was the parish cemetery, and 
in it the chapel of Corpus Christi, founded about 1377 and 
richly endowed. 

A short distance from the city church is the Market 
Square with its many booths, public scale, and the City Hall. 
This City Hall had also become so time-worn that it was 
replaced during Luther's time by a new one. The new build- 
ing was begun in 1523 and completed in 1540. The city 
council consisted of three distinct groups of councilors, each 
group changing about every three years. Thus there were 
three burgomasters (Magistri Civium; Magistri Consulum), 
three judges (Judices Civitatis), and three divisions of 
councilmen of six in each group. Among the many privi- 
leges enjoyed by these councilmen was their annual feast 
at the expense of the city, and the permission to have 
a larger number of guests at a wedding. A burgomaster was 
permitted to invite seven tables of guests, councilmen were 
allowed six tables, whilst the common people had to cele- 



WITTENBERG IN THE DAYS OF LUTHEB. 171 

brate with less than ^ve tables of guests, and were not per- 
mitted to serve more than three meals at any one occasion. 

Wittenberg had several very important guilds: associa- / 
tions of bakers, butchers, tailors, shoemakers, and tanners. ( 
They took a very important and active part in the political,^ 
religious, and social life of the city. Each guild had its own /' 
saint and an altar in the parish church; upon which candles 
were lighted, and where prayers were read for the souls of 
their departed members. They had their own plots in the 
cemeteries and their own priests. Every member was com- 
pelled to attend the funeral services of their departed asso- 
ciates, either in person or represented by their wives. Failure 
to be present or represented meant a fine of six pfennigs. 
The dues in these guilds amounted to the income of three 
days per year per member. These guilds proved a great 
obstacle to the Reformation. 

Before leaving the Market Square, it might be stated 
that all executions took place in this busiest center of the 
city; that the prison was a place to keep out of, not a place 
to live in; and that the law in vogue was "Der Sachsen- 
spiegel," which was publicly read once a year. 

The largest and best-furnished private dwelling in Wit- 
tenberg at Luther's time was the Cranach House, commonly 
called the "Apotheke." Lucas, the painter, came to Witten- 
berg to fill the position of court-painter. From his brush 
we have many portraits of some of the leading notables of 
the day, among these Luther and his parents. He had many 
assistants, for the princes often needed a large number of 
small paintings of themselves to distribute among friends. 
Besides being an artist, he was also a prosperous business 
man. In 1520, he bought from PoUich's (1513) successor. 
Dr. Martinus Josagk, the "Apotheke," the only drug store 
in Wittenberg for more than three hundred years. With 
this "Apotheke" went the privilege to sell spices, merchandise, 
and also sweet wine, if such could not be obtained at the / 
Ratskeller under the City Hall. Cranach, as he was com- \ 
monly called, was also part-owner in a printing establishment, 
and became the richest citizen in Wittenberg, paying taxes 



172 WITTENBEBG IN THE DAYS OF LUTHEB. 

upon property valued at more than four thousand gulden. 
Slowly, but surely, he became Luther's friend and ardent 
disciple. With him and his family Luther enjoyed the closest 
friendship as long as he lived, and the stately home of the 
prosperous artist was one of his favorite resorts. 

Adjoining the Cranach House was an old inn, the "Black 
Bear," where Luther dined when he was recalled by the 
city council from the Wartburg. Luther, owning no money 
at that time, had the fare charged. The bill, amounting to 
forty-two groschen, was paid by the city coimcil in 1525. 

Besides Cranach, Wittenberg had other printers. To 
reach the public ear, Luther made effective use of brief 
pamphlets, becoming, in a short time, the most active and 
influential pamphleteer in Germany. Desiring to have his 
books and pamphlets sold as cheaply as possible, Luther 
refused to take money for his manuscripts, though more 
than one publisher made a fortune out of them. Among the 
various printers in Wittenberg we may mention Johann 
Grueneberg, a neighbor of the Keformer, who printed his 
"Komans" in 1515; Melchior Lother, who came from Basel 
and brought Greek letters; and Hans Lufft, several times 
burgomaster. He printed the first complete German Bible 
in 1534. 

Another center of the religious life of Wittenberg was 

the Castle Church. This building, which made Wittenberg 

world-renowned, was erected in 1449, and became a point 

from which the neighboring village churches were supplied 

with priests, a work that had necessitated the founding of 

a chapter-house for the accommodation of the clergy. This 

church was dedicated to the Virgin Mary and All Saints, 

and was a favorite place of pilgrimage. Large indulgence 

was to be gained from the sight of its holy treasures and 

from contributions to its support. It had nineteen altars. 

"^ Its door served as the "blackboard" for the university an- 

' nouncements. Henning Goeden was priest at this church. 

He was succeeded in 1521 by Justus Jonas, who remained 

until 1541, and was then followed by Caspar Cruciger. 

Adjoining the church was the castle, erected by Frederick 



LUTHER AND HIS FRIENDS. 173 

during the years 1493 to 1499. It was a beautiful building, 
constructed from the material taken from the old fortress 
and the ruined castle of Zahna. Frederick was a wise, 
judicious, and capable ruler and a pious and God-fearing 
prince. He thought very highly of Luther, and showed him 
many marks of favor, but, near as was his palace to the 
monastery, he never met Luther. At first there was no reason 
for summoning the meek monk to the castle, and after Luther 
had gained world-wide prominence, the elector's native pru- 
dence l^ept him from identifying himself too intimately with 
the Reformer's affairs. The discreet and peace-loving Elector 
Frederick usually resided in Altenburg, Torgau, or at Castle 
Lochau. 

At the castle in Wittenberg the famous meeting of Luther 
and the papal legate Cardinal Vergerius took place. Ver- 
gerius had come to "that sink of heresy" in November, 1535, 
and invited the banned and outlawed Luther to breakfast 
with him. 

The light which came from Wittenberg diffused itself 
through the whole world. Luther's work in this insignificant 
town was the commencement of a new era in the history of 
the human mind, and its beneficial influence has been felt 
in every branch of learning, in every department of science, 
and in every institution of civil society. 



Luther and His Friends. 

Prof. W. Moi-l, Concordia College, Fort Wayne, Ind. 

Every great world-movement centers about one person 
who, as it were, gathers in himself the aspirations, hopes, 
and yearnings of his time, and, heroically struggling for- 
ward, brings about the realization of these hopes and aspira- 
tions. While he is, in a sense, a part of the great tidal 
wave which bears him and his age along, he rises above the 
flood, guides it, directs it, and endows the whole movement 
with the stamp of his individuality. Other men are drawn 
toward him, are carried away by his spirit, and become part 



174 LUTHEB AND HIS FRIENDS. 

of the movement. They, in turn, become active agents 
moving others; but they are not original, independent 
forces ; they have their power only in virtue of their associa- 
tion with the master mind. "They," to use a figure of 
Taine's, "constitute the chorus, the master mind is the 
leading man. They sing the same piece together, and at 
times the chorist is equal to the solo artist, but only at times." 

Thus in the great revolutionary movement that made 
an end of the Middle Ages and its whole cultural system, 
the great master mind, the genius, the originator, is Luther; 
his friends and coworkers were merely followers, satellites, 
in a spiritual sense, the children of his loins. 

'Tis true, many, perhaps most of his ideas had been 
expressed by others before him. Many a pious soul had seen 
the abuses in the medieval Church. Great men had risen 
against the tyranny of Rome, and had accomplished great 
things. But they all had remained within the bounds of 
the cultural and religious system of the Middle Ages and 
its characteristic mode of thought. Luther, however, at 
the decisive points broke through the iron ring of tradition 
and prejudice which had bounded the mental horizon of 
men in the Middle Ages, and he thereby ushered in the 
Modem Era. 

Now, Luther did not do this unaided. He attracted 
a great number of highly gifted men to his cause, who 
rendered valiant service and invaluable aid. But these men 
were not originators, were not geniuses, were not master 
minds, but mere day-laborers in the great cause. They did 
Luther's work, under Luther's guidance. Filled with Luther's 
spirit, they carried out Luther's ideas. And whatever has 
had lasting value in their work was done in Luther's spirit; 
whatever was not done in Luther's spirit proved, in the end, 
to be without value, aye, detrimental to the cause. 

Such men were Philip Schwarzerd, John Brenz, John 
Bugenhagen, Justus Jonas, and George Burkhardt, ' or Spa- 
latinus. 

^y far the foremost and greatest among these is Philip 
Schwarzerd, whose German name was Grecized Melanchthon. 



LUTHER AND HIS FRIENDS. 175 

He was born in the small Swabian town of Bretten. His 
father was a man of wealth, and his mother was a niece of 
the famous Humanist Reuchlin, who took a liking to the 
ambitious lad, and supervised his education. Young Philip, 
therefore, received an excellent education. His first teacher 
was a private tutor, recommended by Reuchlin. After a few 
years of training under this most able, though, according 
to modern educational ideas, almost brutally severe master, 
he attended the Latin school at Pforzheim, where he was 
taught the most advanced humanistic learning of his time. 
At the early age of fifteen he received the degree of Artium 
Baccalaureus at the University of Heidelberg. Coming up 
for the master's degree, however, in the following year, his 
application was denied 'TDecause of his youth and boyish 
appearance." He thereupon left Heidelberg and matricu- 
lated at Tuebingen, where, on the twenty-fifth day of 
January, 1614, he received the degree of Master of Arts. 
During the next few years his fame as a classical scholar 
spread throughout Germany, and in 1618, on the recom- 
mendation of Reuchlin, he was called as professor of Greek 
to the newly founded University of Wittenberg. 

From that day to the end of his life he was closely 
associated with the great work of the Reformation of the 
Church, which Luther had begun on that memorable thirty- 
first of October of the previous year. 

Luther at once formed a correct estimate of Melanch- 
thon's ability. He wrote to Spalatin (De Wette, Luthers 
Brief e, 1, 134. 135) : "As regards our Philip Melanchthon, 
everything shall be done as you suggest. On the fourth day 
after his arrival he delivered a most learned and chaste 
oration to the delight and admiration of all. It is now not 
necessary for you to commend him. We quickly retracted 
the opinion we had formed of him when we first saw him. 
Now we laud and admire the reality in him, and thank the 
most illustrious Prince and your kindness. Be at pains to 
commend him most heartily to the Prince. I desire no other 
Greek teacher so long as we have him." 

And Luther was not disappointed in Melanchthon. Philip 



176 LUTHEB AND HIS FRIENDS. 

was all that Luther expected of him, and more. Luther him- 
self had found the Truth by studying the Bible in the original 
tongues, and he had lectured on several books of the Old 
as well as of the 'New Testament ; but he was not professedly 
a technical Greek scholar, though his knowledge of Greek 
was by no means small. In Melanchthon, however, the 
university now had a Grecian of the Grecians. And all of 
his knowledge of Greek Melanchthon employed in the service 
of theology. By applying his knowledge of Greek to the 
sacred text and interpreting it to the theological students, 
he carried out Luther's idea that all sound knowledge of 
Scripture and of all soimd theology must be based upon 
a thorough study of the sacred text in the original tongue. 
He thereby soon made himself indispensable to Luther, who 
valued him highly both as a friend and as a scholar of 
great ability and learning. Luther said of him: "Philip 
has only the humble title of Master, but he excels all the 
Doctors. There is no one living adorned with such gifts. 
He must be held in honor. Whoever despises this man, him 
God will despise." {Corpus Reformatorum 10, 302.) And 
in his Preface to Melanchthon's Commentary on the Epistle 
to the Colossians he wrote: "I am rough, boisterous, stormy, 
and altogether wdrlike. I am bom to fight innumerable 
monsters and devils. I must remove stumps and stones, cut 
away thistles and thorns, and clear the wild forests; but 
Master Philip comes along softly and gently, sowing and 
watering with joy, according to the gift which God has 
abundantly bestowed upon him." 

In these words and in many others Luther expressed his 
high opinion of Melanchthon's scholarship and his just 
appreciation of Melanchthon's peculiar gifts and abilities. 
He realized that the shy, timid, retiring scholar was, to 
a certain extent, a necessary complement to himself and his 
robust, aggressive nature. 

Melanchthon, in turn, held Luther, who had shown him 
the way of truth and life, in reverence as a spiritual father. 
He, at the beginning at least, realized that Luther was the 
head, he but a hand; that Luther was the leader, he but 



LUTHEB AND HIS FBIENDS. 177 

a humble follower; that Luther was the teacher, he but 
a pupil. In this spirit he labored together with Luther, 
and through his labors furthered Luther's great work more 
than all other followers of Luther put together. Ever since 
the Leipzig Disputation of 1619, whiqh might be called 
a turning-point of his life, he actively participated in the 
work of the Reformation. At Leipzig his faith in the 
authority of the existing Church was completely shaken, 
and his studies thenceforth took a more decidedly theological 
direction. 

And the service he rendered the cause was great indeed. 
Being violently attacked by Eck for having ventured to 
express an opinion on the disputants, he replied in an open 
letter, in which he defended the positions of Carlstadt and 
Luther, particularly the opinions expressed by Luther for 
the first time in the course of the Leipzig Disputation; to 
wit, his opinions concerning the primacy of the Roman see, 
and the view that the Fathers of the Church had erred, and 
must not be employed in judging Scripture. This letter 
showed Melanchthon to be fully conversant with the questions 
at issue, and to be a master of keen, trenchant logic. And 
ever since then his pen never rested in the cause of the 
Reformation. 

He wrote the first systematic presentation of Lutheran 
doctrine in his Loci Communes; he was the author of the 
Augsburg Confession and of the Apology thereof; he took 
part in all the great colloquies of the day, both with the 
Zwinglians and with the papists, and at Worms and Regens- 
burg he conducted the disputations with the Romanists 
almost single-handed. 

He has received most praise, however, for the way in 
which he carried out Luther's ideas on popular and higher 
education as laid down in his famous Appeal to the Aldermen 
of All the German Cities in Behalf of Christian Schools, 
He did this with such wisdom and good judgment that he 
has justly been called the Teacher of Germany (Praeceptor 
Grermaniae). The development and intelligent application 
of Luther's principles gave to Protestant Germany the intel- 

Four Hundred Years. 12 



178 LUTHEB AND HIS FBIENDS. 

lectual and spiritual preeminence which has been hers for 
the last four hundred years, and to which has been added, 
within the last century, preeminence in every other field of 
human endeavor — political, economic, military, and moral. 

The new thing in Melanchthon's scheme of higher edu- 
cation was the utilization of humanistic learning for the 
purposes of Lutheran thought and education. Classical 
learning was fused with Lutheranism, so to speak, and 
gave to the gymnasia and universities of Germany their 
distinctive character. And the courses of study prescribed 
by Melanchthon for the higher schools remained unaltered 
in the main imtil the beginning of the nineteenth century, 
when the progress of learning and the changed conditions 
of modem life made changes in the curricula imperative. 

It has become customary of late in certain quarters to 

. exalt Melanchthon at the expense of Luther. Said a recent 

biographer of Melanchthon: ''Without Melanchthon the 

nailing of the Ninety-five Theses had ended in a monkish 

squabble, to be followed, perhaps, by a new school of theolcgy 

in the old Church." Such a view of the relative importance 

of the work and genius of the two men seems to us utterly 

at variance with a correct appreciation of the facts in the 

case, as well as with the judgment of Melanchthon himself 

as shown by his conduct. Melanchthon's was a highly gifted 

nature, endowed with a good memory, the power of clear, 

systematic presentation and great dialectic skill, to which 

was added great humanistic learning; but Melanchthon was 

not a mind possessed of sufficient robustness to work his way 

through the inherited traditional view of the Middle Ages, 

nor would his soul have been courageous enough to maintain 

the truth against the power of the Roman curia. Luther, 

however, was a man of a different mold. His was the 

colossal intellect that had won inward freedom from the 

system that held the mightiest intellects of the Middle Ages 

in hopeless thraldom, and his, also, was the undaunted 

courage that said at Worms: "Here I stand. I cannot do 

'Otherwise. God help me! Amen." Nay, if need bfe, such 

lind could well dispense with a mind like Melanchthon's. 



LUTHER AND HIS FRIENDS. 179 

There are two points in which Luther's inferiority to 
Melanehthon and his dependence upon him are especially 
stressed — philology and systematic presentation of doctrine. 
Let us look at these contentions somewhat more narrowly. 

Luther possessed genuine philological ability of the highest 
order in the modern sense of the term. He was a genius, 
a master of the craft, as is shown by his sureness of critical 
judgment in declaring, "for linguistic and internal reasons, 
as spurious ^ve treatises which had been handed down under 
the name of Augustine. Later investigation has completely 
confirmed his judgment. Equally apt and surprising are 
his famous remarks about the style, provenance, and historical 
value of the Biblical books. Though he, in this respect, 
followed, in the main, the verdict of the great scholars of 
the ancient Church, Eusebius of Caesarea and Jerome, he 
added a mass of striking observations and acute suppositions 
of his own. What is most important, he at once, without 
lengthy parley, draws from the critical results the correct 
conclusions." (Boehmer.) With this compare Melanchthon's 
philological ability. He was a highly gifted man, trained 
to his business, with a mind stored with varied and extensive 
learning of marvelous accuracy, but not a master of the craft. 

Again, much has been made of Melanchthon's systema- 
tizing. Says the biographer quoted above: "Melanehthon 
laid the foundation of the dogmatic system of Protestant 
theology, and wrote the first confession of the Protestant 
Church. Their [i, e., Luther's and Melanchthon's] combined 
labors brought into existence the Evangelical Lutheran 
Church." The statement is perfectly correct. Only we 
should like to see more stress laid on Luther and less on 
Melanehthon. 'Tis true, says Boehmer, it was not Luther, 
but Melanehthon "who first undertook the obvious task of 
briefly summarizing the basic ideas of the Evangelical mes- 
sage. Considering that it is the first attempt of its kind, 
this survey is unquestionably a splendid achievement. Never- 
theless the systematists find in it much, indeed very much, 
that is faulty. To Luther, however, it seemed wholly ade- 
quate; indeed, it was in his eyes an unsurpassable, classic. 



180 LUTHEB AND HIS FBIENDS. 

canonic achievement, transcending all his own works in 
value and usefulness for the public. This is proof sufficient 
that his demands in this respect were not very exacting. . . . 
Undoubtedly this [Luther's] enormous facility in the pro- 
duction of ideas is most intimately related to his lack of 
system. The energetic endeavor to construct a closciy knit 
organized whole naturally puts a decided check on the 
inclination to give room to new ideas and hence also on 
the ability to produce new ideas; in fact, it gradually kills 
this faculty, while, in the opposite ease, the mind remains 
fresh for new concepts, and always can give itself up without 
restraint to the impulse of forming new ideas. We con- 
sequently do not claim too much when we assert that tha 
Reformer's lack of system is a necessary outgrowth of his 
tremendous intellectual fertility, and to that extent also 
a necessary prerequisite of his world-historical activity. . . . 

"The genuine systematists are mostly not creative 
thinkers, and vice versa, creative minds, as a rule, lack the 
capacity for organization. . . . They alone bring forth some- 
thing new, release new forces, and found new institutions 
of historical life, while the systematists have only the more 
modest task of organizing and concentrating the new ideas." 

Melanchthon, then, was merely a systematizer, a codiiier, 
if you will, of the great Biblical truths which Luther's 
massive, undaunted intellect, thanks to the guidance of the 
Holy Spirit, had rediscovered and again given to the world. 
It was Luther who had broken through the whole medieval 
view of life, had seen the truth of God, had proclaimed it, 
and victoriously maintained it against the combined attack 
of pope, emperor, and devil. Melanchthon was merely the 
underling who, according to the measure of his ability kept 
the master's storehouse in order. 

At this point there rises the question of Melanchthon's 
faithfulness in the work he was doing. This is a vexed 
question, and only a long, careful study of the original 
sources, of Melanchthon's works, and of reliable contemporary 
testimony can enable one to pronounce an opinion. 

This much is established, that Melanchthon did not agree 



I LUTHEB AND HIS FBIENDS. 181 

with Luther on many points of doctrine; yet he formulated 
theses of Luther's doctrine for others to accept. He publicly 
subscribed to tenets he did not hold. This is true particularly 
of the doctrine of the Sacraments, on which his views were 
of such a nature that Calvin called him a dissembler for 
his failure publicly to state his dissent from Luther's views. 

Again, even in the earliest edition of his Loci, as well as 
in the Augsburg Confession, he intentionally omitted a defi- 
nite statement on Free Will, for the simple reason, as it 
seems, that he secretly shared Erasmus's views and not 
Luther's. He has won a great deal of praise for these omis- 
sions at the hands of such as would bear Luther's name 
without teaching his doctrine. He has been praised by 
syncretists generally, and especially by the synergists in 
the Lutheran Church, who believe that Luther's view of 
a will not free in spiritual matters relieves man of moral 
responsibility, and kills all initiative. But we, as Lutherans, 
cannot but deplore Melanchthon's lack of candor, as well as 
his inability to see Divine^Truth, while as men of thought we 
rejoice to find that Luther's and not Erasmus's views on the 
will are in accord with results of modem psychological in- 
vestigations of this deep subject. 

That Luther never -objected to Melanchthon's omission 
in the Loci Communes can be easily accoimted for by the 
fact that Luther considered this doctrine too difficult for 
general discussion; that he looked upon it as one of the deep 
things in our faith — a doctrine not to be puzzled over or 
to be discussed lightly, but to be reverently stated in the 
simple terms of Scripture, and to be accepted in simple faith. 
The matter, however, assumes a different complexion in 
a later edition of the Loci, where Melanchthon wrote: "CuAi 
promissio sit universalis, nee sint in Deo contrariae volun- 
tates, necesse est in nobis esse aliquam discriminis causam, 
cur Saul abjiciatur, David recipiatur." (Since the promise 
is universal, and there are no conflicting wills in God, there 
must needs be some cause of discrimination in us.) "An 
argument," says Prof. A. L. Graebner (Theol. Quart. I, 229), 
"in which Melanchthon is at the same tim^ a synergist 



( 



182 LUTHEB AND HIS FRIENDS. | 

[position of the Ohio Synod] with his in nohis and a ration- 
alist with his necesse est/' Here Melanchthon in so many 
words is teaching a doctrine at variance with the funda- 
mentals of Luther's teaching — and of Bible-teaching. 

If we bear in mind Melanchthon's timidity, his lack of 
personal courage, and his desire to preserve the peace with 
the Romanists, we can understand many things in his con- 
duct, even the somewhat ignoble spirit that prompted him 
to minimize, in the Augsburg Confession, the differences 
with Rome, and to magnify those with the Zwinglians, with 
whom he indeed held many views in common that he did 
not share with Luther. Bearing his personal timidity in 
mind, we can perhaps accept the plea of his apologists, that 
he differed from Luther's doctrine only in matters he himself 
deemed non-essential, and that, in his concessions to Rome 
in the interimistic conflicts, he honestly believe<l that he 
had saved the essentials of Lutheran truth by yielding 
adiaphora. Still, in view of the fact that he chafed under 
the restraint imposed upon him by Luther's personality, 
and that he wrote to others that lie felt like a slave in his 
relations to Luther, we cannot but deplore the fact that 
Melanchthon lacked the manliness and candor openly to face 
Luther and arrive at an understanding with him. Lf 
Melanchthon was not actually dishonest in his position both 
before and after Luther's death, he was, to say the least, 
extremely weak, and the universal mistrust with which 
Flacius, Amsdorf, and others looked upon him was caused 
by his lack of candor and consistency. 

And, lastly, Melanchthpn's letter to Camerarius, when he 
was first apprised of Luther's marriage, shows him in an 
extremely unfavorable light. We shall not give the letter 
in full, but merely refer to it. In this letter Melanchthon 
shows himself weak, suspicious, not above baseless, cruel 
slanders against the man whom he publicly professes to 
revere as a spiritual father. Likewise his letter to Carlowitz, 
in which he accuses Luther of "often giving way to his 
temperament, in which there is not a little of contentious- 
ness," is not explained by the explanation he tried to give 



LUTHEB AND HIS FBIENDS. 183 

later in his letter to Dietrich von Maltz (Unschuldige Nach- 
richten, 1707, p. 85), but remains an evidence of his lack 
of manliness and spiritual greatness. In real soul quality 
he seems to have been as small as his body. 

The attempt of admirers and apologists of Melanchthon, 
therefore, to make him one of the great heroes of the Refor- 
mation must fail to awaken a responsive chord in our hearts. 
Nevertheless, while we deplore his lack of courage, candor, 
and straightforwardness, his weakness in dealing with the 
representatives of the popish system, and his deviation, in his 
systematic statement of doctrine, from revealed truth on 
the question of the doctrine of the human will and divine 
grace, let us not forget the great service he has rendered the 
cause of the Reformation. Let us cover his weaknesses with 
the cloak of charity, and let us gratefully acknowledge that, 
despite his shortcomings, he, too, was a chosen instrument in 
the hand of God to further the great work of the Lutheran 
Reformation. 

A discussion of Luther's other intimate friends and co- 
workers is a great deal less difficult than a discussion of 
Melanchthon because there is in their characters nothing of 
the wavering, of the inconsistency, and of the lack of candor 
that is so annoying to the student of the life of Melanchthon. 
John Brenz, John Bugenhagen, Justus Jonas, and Spalatin 
were Luther's confidants and advisers at all times and at all 
seasons. There was not at any time the least indication 
of a misunderstanding between Luther and any one of them. 
Open, frank, candid, straightforward, and of independent 
minds withal, their relations with Luther were always rela- 
tions of mutual trust and confidence. Not one of them ever 
felt that his relation with Luther was becoming irksome, 
that he had to yield to Luther in the spirit of a slave, or that 
he had to make a sacrifice of his own convictions in order 
to please Luther. Though they were men of great theological 
learning, their talents were preeminently practical, and their 
greatest importance lies in the service they rendered as 
organizers, administrators, and men of affairs. 

Brenz was first drawn to Luther at the disputation held 



184 LUTHEB AND HIS FRIENDS. 

at the general chapter of the Augustinian order at Heidel- 
berg, in the year 1518. Without entering upon the subject 
of his Ninety-five Theses, published in the previous year, 
Luther conducted this disputation in a manner that won for 
him the hearts of all present. Among these were John Brenz, 
Erhard Schnepf, and Martin Bucer, all of whom soon took 
prominent parts in the Protestant movement. Brenz soon 
came to Wittenberg, where he gained Luther's confidence, 
and became his lifelong friend. Because of his rare gifts, 
he was chosen, at the early age of twenty-three years, to 
introduce the Reformation in the imperial free city of 
Schwaebischhall, where he remained to the end of his useful 
life. He remained in perfect accord with Luther throughout, 
organizing, abolishing abuses, introducing Biblical doctrine 
and practise with rare tact and judgment, without sacrificing 
one jot or tittle of divine truth, yet without giving offense to 
the simplest folk. 

• Nor did he lack theological learning and dialectic skill. 
In 1529, he wrote a catechism which alone of the many 
catechisms written at that time has been able to hold its 
own by the side of Luther's catechism. When Zwingli and 
Oecolampadius tried to introduce their doctrines in Swabia, 
Brenz effectually foiled their attempts, principally by means 
of the famous Syngramma, which was signed by fourteen 
Swabian pastors, but was written by Brenz, Whenever an 
important colloquy was held, either with the Romanists or 
with the Zwinglians, Brenz was invariably consulted, and 
was usually asked to be present. 

John Bugenhagen, sumamed Pomeranus, was even more 
closely associated with Luther than was Brenz, for he re- 
mained at Wittenberg to the end of his life. 

He came to Wittenberg shortly after the Diet of Worms, 
well trained in theology and humanistic learning, and at 
once began to teach at the university. He became a close 
personal friend of Luther's, and remained united with him 
in the closest friendship until Luther's death. As early 
as 1522, Luther secured for him the appointment as pastor 
of the town church, much against the wishes of the chapter, 



LUTHEB AND HIS FRIENDS. 185 

most of whose members were still attached to the old order 
of things. As pastor of the town church he advanced the 
cause of the new doctrine in every conceivable manner. In 
1524, he abolished private masses, and voted that they should 
be abolished in the richly endowed Church of All Saints, 
of which Justus Jonas was provost. Though he received 
flattering calls to Hamburg and to Danzig, he remained at 
Wittenberg, where, he saw, he could render greater service 
to the holy cause. 

He took part in all the controversies of the day, and 
proved an invaluable adviser to Luther at all important 
conferences and colloquies, and his name appears as one 
of the signatories of almost all the various articles of agree- 
ment that were drawn up between Luther and the various 
Protestant leaders whose teachings had differed from those 
of Luther. 

The most signal service, however, that he rendered to the 
Lutheran movement was his Work as organizer and ad- 
ministrator of church-affairs in cities and countries that 
were anxious to introduce the Reformation. In 1528, he 
introduced the Reformation in the duchy of Braunschweig. 
From Braunschweig he went to Hamburg on a similar mis- 
sion, returning in 1529. In 1531, he rendered the same 
service to the great commercial center and free imperial 
city of Luebeck. And in 1537, after the death of King 
Frederick, he introduced the Reformation in Denmark, where 
he remained for two years, organizing the ecclesiastical 
establishment and the educational system of the kingdom. 
He also crowned the new king. Christian III. 

Personally, he seems to have been more to Luther than 
any other man of his day. The open, unreserved exchange 
of opinions with Bugenhagen was a great boon to Luther, 
and did a great deal to keep up Luther's spirits and health. 
Luther performed the marriage ceremony at Bugenhagen's 
wedding, and Bugenhagen, in turn, officiated at Luther's 
wedding. When the plague was raging at Wittenberg, Luther 
and Bugenhagen remained in the stricken city, and braved 
the terrible foe; and when, on a later occasion, Luther was 



186 LUTHER AXD HIS FRIENDS. 

about to leave Wittenberg in disgust, it was Bugenhagen 
who prevailed upon him to remain. 

The third in this circle of friends was Justus Jonas, the 
Erfurt Humanist, who, having become an ardent admirer of 
Luther despite Erasmus's warnings, had, in 1519, exchanged 
the study of law for that of theology. When Luther, on his 
journey to Worms, passed through Erfurt, he was met at 
Weimar by Justus Jonas and conducted in triumphal entry 
into the city of Erfurt, and when he entered the city of 
Worms, his carriage was followed by Jonas on horseback. 

Before long, Jonas was appointed provost of the Church 
of All Saints at Wittenberg and professor of Canonical Law 
in the University. The professorship of Law, however, he 
soon exchanged for a professorship of theology, after he 
had taken his doctor's degree in theology. From 1523 to 
1533, he was dean of the university. 

Like Brenz and Bugenhagen, and quite unlike Melanch- 
thon, he was a warm-hearted, courageous man, a true friend, 
and, as such, a genuine help and assistance to the great 
Reformer. 

He gave evidence of his courage when, in 1522, he 
insisted that the sacred relics which John Frederick had 
collected at enormous expense, and stored in the Church 
of All Saints, should no longer be exhibited, and again, in 
the same year, when he expressed himself as in favor of 
introducing the communion in both kinds. 

Moreover, he was a man of great learning and ability. 
He translated Luther's famous diatribe against Erasmus, 
De Servo Arhitrio, into German, and, on other occasions, 
translated some of Luther's German works into Latin. He 
was present at many of the colloquies with the Zwinglians 
and the Romanists, and, at Augsburg, exerted a salutary 
restraining influence upon Melanchthon, who, having lost 
all self-possession, was about to yield still more than he 
had already yielded in the Augsburg Confession. 

Luther always entertained a particular affection for him, 
and took him with him on his journey to Eisleben in 1546. 
And when Luther was dying, Justus Jonas asked him, "Rev- 



LUTHEB AND HIS FRIENDS. 187 

erende pater, will you remain steadfast in Christ and the 
doctrine which you have preached?" Whereupon Luther 
replied with a loud "Aye." 

Georg Burkhardt, or Spalatinus, as he is generally called, 
having taken this name from Spalt in Franconia, his native 
town, occupies a position somewhat apart in this famous 
group. 

He had studied at Erfurt, had become a priest in 1507, 
and, in 1514, had been appointed court chaplain and privy 
councilor to the Elector Frederick the Wise. In this official 
capacity he had abundant opportunity to aid Luther's cause, 
and he availed himself of every opportunity that offered. 
We may safely say that, more than anything else, it was 
Spalatin's influence, exerted at the proper moments, that 
guided the elector's conduct with reference to Luther and 
his cause. He it was that fought Luther's battles at the 
electoral court, and prompted the elector to protect Luther 
against his enemies, and to brave the terrors of papal ex- 
communication and imperial ban. It is more than doubtful 
whether Frederick would have espoused the cause of the 
Reformation as emphatically as he did, had it not been for 
Spalatin's influence. Many an evil advice was counteracted, 
many a sinister design frustrated thanks to the fact that 
he had the elector's ear. 

Moreover, he was the intermediary, the channel of com- 
munication, so to speak, between Luther and the elector. He, 
therefore, carried on an active correspondence with Luther. 
This correspondence, most of which has been preserved, 
affords an insight into the inner development of the course 
of the events of that great period. Luther was wont to 
present all his requests and petitions to the elector through 
Spalatin, and to discuss with him all his undertakings. He 
would submit to him every new polemical tract, and take 
counsel with him whenever a new attack was made by the 
enemy. 

Spalatin, it may be stated here, played a part in the 
Reformation that is usually underestimated. 'Tis true, he 
was not in the forefront of the battle; he was not a great 



188 LUTHER AS A PBEACHEB. 

leader, not a great scholar, not a great systematizer, not 
a great organizer and administrator. Yet much depended 
upon him, for the elector was guided by Spalatin's judgment 
in all things connected with Luther and the imiversity. 
Truly, it is not saying too much to maintain that Spalatin 
was the Lord's chosen instrument for the protection and 
preservation of the life of the Father of the Reformation. 



Luther as a Preacher. 

Rev. John H. C. Fbitz, St. Louis, Mo. 

"Preach the Gospel!" This command of Christ unto 
His Church sufficiently emphasizes the fact that it has 
"pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them 
that believe." 

Preaching had a prominent place, in the life of Luther 
and in the work of the Reformation. 

Several centuries prior to the Reformation preaching as 
a recognized institution was non-existent. At length preach- 
ing orders arose, but their preaching was not of the kind 
which could save sinners. Some read sermons that came 
ready-made to hand; some preached sermons of a scholastic 
type; some related stories about saints and told legends; 
some even amused their hearers with ridiculous anecdotes. 
Some of the sermons, perhaps of the better type, were in 
Latin and unintelligible to the great mass of hearers. Small 
wonder that the churches were deserted, and that such men 
as Savonarola, Wyclif, and Waldus, supplying a real need, 
attracted large numbers of hearers. 

The result of preaching depends upon the message which 
it has. Luther's preaching had one overmastering thought, 
and that thought was Christ. There are three things which 
made Luther a great preacher, perhaps the greatest since 
the days of the apostles: First, Luther preached the Bible; 
secondly, he preached it in simple and clear language; 
thirdly, he addressed it to the wants of men, took aim at 
the heart, shot forth spiritual arrows which did not miss 



LUTHEB AS A PBEACUEB. 189 

their mark. These things characterize the great preachers 
of all times. 

Luther preached much. Sometimes he preached four 
sermons on a Sunday and two or three during the week. 
He was much in demand as a preacher. The people heard 
him gladly. He was, in the good sense of the word, a popular 
preacher, a preacher of the people, 

Luther had rare gifts, which served him in good stead 
as a preacher: a thorough knowledge of the Bible, a good 
acquaintance with the writings of the church-fathers and 
the classics, a mind well informed as to the facts of history, 
and filled with stores of knowledge on many subjects, a keen 
perception of human nature, an abundance of personal 
experiences, a perfect understanding of the conditions of 
his time, a happy faculty to address himself to all classes 
of men, a masterly use of the Gterman language, and, com- 
bined with all this, a heroic faith, an undaunted courage, 
a good judgment, an untiring energy, a fervent zeal, an 
enduring patience, an alert mind, a keen insigtt, a remark- 
able memory, and a sympathetic charity. 

Luther's own ideas as to preaching must be gleaned 
from his many writings. "The great subject of preaching," 
says Luther, "is the glory of God in Jesus Christ. We 
preach always Him, the true God and man, who died for our 
sins and rose again for our justification. This may seem 
a limited and monotonous subject, likely to be soon exhausted, 
but we are never at the end of it." "There is no more 
terrible aflBiction, misery, and misfortune upon earth than 
a preacher who does not preach the Word of God, of whom 
there are,. I am sorry to say, many in this world." "Preachers 
should be angels, God's messengers, whose conversation is in 
heaven, who always diligently study the Word of God, in 
order that they do not preach the doctrine of man." "If 
any one has a Bible-text given, and he be not able to make 
a sermon, he ought not to be a preacher." "Not that is 
a Christian sermon which preaches the historical Christ. . . . 
You should teach and testify that the Gospel of Christ is 
given unto us who believe for righteousness and salvation." 



190 LUTHEB AS A PREACHER. 

^Tirst the Law should be preached, then the promises of 
Christ." "One cannot speak of that which he does not we'l 
know and understand." "He is a foolish preacher who thinks 
that he must say all that comes to his mind. A preacher 
should stick to the main point of his text." "Preaching to 
the people, we should let white be white and black be black, 
and speak to them in simple, clear language, so that they 
can understand us. What pains did Christ, our Lord, take 
to teach in simple language !" "To preach clearly and simply 
is a great art." "It is a common mistake made by preachers 
to preach so that the common people derive little benefit." 
"A preacher must speak with boldness" (kein Blatt vors 
Maul nehmen). He should address the wants of the people, 
^'giving, as a wise steward, unto each his portion of meat 
in due season." "It is foolishness to use many words and 
say nothing." "It speaks well for a preacher to hear the 
people say when he has finished his sermon that they fain 
would have heard him preach longer." Luther was theoreti- 
cally not a friend of long sermons, but he often transgressed 
his own rule. lie could, it appears, hold the attention 
of the people, and was, no doubt, guided by that fact. 
A preacher, says Luther, must be able to teach the truth, 
should speak slowly, have a good head and a good voice, be 
diligent, put his very life into his work, and expect that 
all men will criticise him. 

A large number of Luther's sermons have been handed 
down to us. Luther was not in the habit of writing his 
sermons. The large amount of work he had probably pre- 
vented him from doing so. He would meditate upon the 
main thoughts of his sermon and then preach. Luther's 
sermons were, more or less carefully, revised for the press 
by friends. 

As a rule, Luther based his sermons on a certain text 
of Scripture. Most of his sermons are on the Gospel- and 
Epistle-lessons of the well-known pericopic system. He 
seldom used free texts, but in week-day services he would 
preach on whole books of the Bible. He did not intend his 



LUTHER AS A PREACHER. 191 

example in this respect to be followed by all. Prevailing 
conditions, he thought, required it. 

Luther paid very little attention to the outward form 
of the sermon. The divine message which he had to deliver 
was the one absorbing thought that received his consideration. 
He preached because he had something to tell. He did not, 
as a rule, begin his sermons with long introductions. Fre- 
quently he would state his subject at once. A sermon on 
the epistle of the Fourth Sunday in Advent he begins by 
simply saying : "This is a brief epistle, but it contains a very 
important and profound doctrine of the Christian faith. 
The apostle speaks, first of all, of our conduct toward God; 
and, secondly, toward our neighbor." Then he proceeds at 
once with the sermon proper. His themes expressed clearly 
and concisely the main thought of the text, but they were 
not of a stereotyped form. The sermon was strictly textual. 
Very often Luther would expound verse after verse. He 
was an expository preacher. His leading thoughts were 
always faith and charity, justification and sanctification, 
giving to each its proper place and its due importance. 
He did not preach sanctification at the expense of justifi- 
cation, a sin of which many sectarian preachers are guilty; 
but he did not fail duly to emphasize the necessity of the 
Christian life. His sermons were immensely practical, as 
all preaching, in order to serve its purpose, should be. They 
were heart-to-heart talks. Luther's language is beautiful. 
It is clear, simple, and, therefore, forceful. He explained 
words and phrases. He often quoted proverbial sayings, the 
very nature of which is to express a truth clearly in a few 
words. He spoke in parables taken from every-day life. 
He told the truth plainly. He preached the Law with all 
severity, sparing no one. He preached the Gospel with 
utmost suavity, and comforted and encouraged the terror- 
stricken sinner. When he denounced false doctrine and all 
manner of sin, his language to us at times appears to have 
been rude, but it was altogether in keeping with his time. 
When Luther had expounded his text, he stopped speaking, 

Luther did not think highly of himself as a preacher. 



192 LUTHER AS A PREACHER. 

He said, "I have often been disgusted with myself (habe 
mich oft angespien) when I came from the pulpit." He 
complains that he sometimes did not follow his notes, but 
says that just at such a time the people would highly praise 
his sermon. He was ever mindful of the great resjwnsibility 
resting upon the man in the pulpit. "Believe me," he said, 
"a sermon is not the work of man. Be not too bold, but 
be a preacher who fears Gk)d. I am an old and experienced 
preacher, nevertheless to the present day I feel uneasy when 
I must preach." 

It is well that Luther had a humble opinion of himself 
as a preacher, for we think the more highly of him. Beware 
of the preacher who sings his own praises! 

Luther's method of sermonizing has been called the 
"heroic method." More properly it might be called Luther's 
method. Luther's sermons, as all his writings, bear the 
stamp of originality. His very originality contributed much 
to his popularity. 

Luther cannot be imitated. Neither should he be. Let 
every preacher be himself. There is very much, though, 
which we can learn from Luther. Those very things which 
made Luther great as a preacher are the things which make 
any preacher great. Every preacher should seek to be great; 
not, indeed, for the sake of greatness, — that would be sinful 
vanity, and would itself stand in the way of real great- 
ness, — but for the sake of the cause of Christ, which the 
preacher espouses ; and that he should consider a sacred duty. 

The privileges, responsibilities, and opportunities which 
the Lord has given unto His Church demand that the very 
best men be in the Christian pulpit. As it is, the land is 
filled with an abundance of poor preachers. The great need 
of the hour is that there be more preachers who, like to 
Luther, seek solely the salvation of sinners, and thus the 
glory of God, and who to this end, trusting in the many 
gracious promises of God, will preach the Oospel of Jesus 
Christ to the multitudes within the Church and to the still 

"ter multitudes without the Church; in short, preachers 



LUTHEB AS A PREACHER. 193 

are needed that are fully devoted to their God and to that 
work which God has called them to do in His name. 

Luther says that David in the 119th Psalm gives unto 
him who would be a theologian a threefold rule, which he 
chooses to express with three words: Oraiio, meditatio, 
tentatio (prayer, study, and personal experience). The 
preacher who neglects diligently to ask God to bless his 
work, who does not diligently study his Bible, and all that 
will be helpful to him in his calling, and who has but little 
experienced the power of the Word in his own heart and 
life, will not make a successful preacher nor pastor. He 
had better take up some other work. 

What is lacking in much of the preaching of our day 
are the very things which made Luther's preaching both 
interesting and profitable. As to these very things Luther's 
sermons should be carefully studied. The result of such 
study will be found in the greater success with which preach- 
ing will be blessed to the glory of God. Foremost, of course, 
must stand Luther's scripturalness of preaching, but second 
to it his directness. Luther's method of preaching ought to 
be revived. Many sermons are artificial and mechanical. 
The preacher, when meditating upon and writing his sermons, 
should not have his homiletical rules (good and needful as 
these may be in themselves) uppermost in his mind, but the 
needs of the people. Sermons should not be preached because 
the time for preaching has come, but because the preacher 
has a divine message to deliver. The preacher should not 
seek to please people with his sermons, but to henefit them. 
He should not aim at "fine writing" when making his 
sermons, but at preaching the Gospel in the very simplest 
language. There is not only a Gospel-famine in the land, 
but also much Gospel-preaching "over the heads of the 
people." '^When I preach," said Luther, ^T! regard neither 
the doctors nor magistrates, . . . but I have an eye to the 
multitude of young people, children, and servants." 

While it is sadly true that the multitudes prefer to go 
to the playhouses and not to the churches, it is also sadly 
true that much of the poor church attendance of our day is 

Four Hundred Years. 13 



194 lutueb's influence on populab education. 

due to poor preaching. ^'Audiei^ces are held by useful and 
clear sermons," says the Apology of the Augsburg Con- 
fession. If the preacher will not put much into his sermon, 
he need not be surprised that the people will not come to 
get anything out of it. 

The work of the Reformation will best be commemorated^ 
if all preachers, to begin with, will better learn from Luther 
not only what to preach, but also how to preach; for Luther 
preached the doctrine of Christ, and he preached it after 
the manner of Christ. 



Luther's Influence on Popular Education. 

Pbof. W. C. Kohn, Concordia Teachers* College, River Forest, 111. 

A brief survey of the history of education of all nations 
will force us to yield assent to the statement so commonly 
made that Luther is the father of popular education. 

The education of the Jews provided for Jewish children 
only. The Oriental education was based on the promulgar 
tion of the caste system, or fostered class distinction by 
affording superior advantages to the children of the privi- 
leged few, and neglecting the enlightenment of the lower 
classes, regarding them as incapable of considerable intel- 
lectual development. The Grecian and Roman education 
was founded on the despotism of the State, and was based 
on the theory tkat education consisted foremost in training 
citizens, who were under allegiance to the State, who could 
have no other interest than that interwoven with the interest 
of the State. 

Christianity marked a new era in education, giving an 
entirely new foundation, and setting a new goal for it. The 
aim of Christian education is the welfare of all men, of 
each and every individual of whatever race or color, sweep- 
ing away all castes, and abolishing Oriental class distinction, 
thereby not only seeking the earthly welfare and bodily 
comfort of humanity, but also the spiritual welfare of the 
individual and the preparation of his soul for eternal bliss. 



Luther's influence on populab education. 195 

Thus a firm basis for popular education was provided for by 
Christ Himself. Many centuries, however, elapsed before 
this impulse accomplished its culmination. 

Education before the Reformation Period. 

The period covering the time between the sixth century 
and the Reformation has very appropriately been called the 
Dark Ages. Historians, however, do not intend to condemn 
everything in these ages pertaining to education. Seeley 
says : "These fifteen centuries embrace those generally known 
in history as the Dark Ages, during which progress was 
indeed slow. But when we remember the obstacles which 
were to be met, ... we marvel at the great results attained." 
Roman Catholic writers, however, have often attempted to 
reconstruct the history of these centuries to such an extent 
as to gloss over the guilt of the Catholic Church by diminish- 
ing the corruption of the papal hierarchy, by magnifying 
the obstacles which were to be met, ^nd by aggrandizing the 
little achievements of the Church or its orders. 

However, frankly admitting that one cannot condemn 
everything in those centuries, every unprejudiced student of 
history will, nevertheless, most readily be convinced that 
the causes of the darkness and of the ignorance in the edu- 
cational field of the Dark Ages were the decline of the 
Church and its departure from the fundamental principles 
of education laid down by our Savior Jesus Christ. If the 
Church had abided by the teachings of the Bible, the whole 
Bible, it would never have permitted papacy to rise, and 
the aim of its educational system would not have been to 
give the hierarchy power to wield its scepter for the stulti- 
fication of the masses such as had developed at the dawn 
of the sixteenth century. 

Recapitulating the history of the Middle Ages, Campayre 
writes: "The Middle Ages, in itself, whatever effort may be 
put forth at this day to rehabilitate it, and to discover in it 
the golden age of modem societies, remains an ill-starred 
epoch. A few virtues, negative for the most part, virtues of 
obedience 'and consecration, cannot atone for the real faults 
of those rude and barbarous centuries. . . . Popular edu- 



196 LUTHER*8 INFLUENCE OX POPULAB EDUCATION. 

cation was almost null and restricted to the teaching of the 
catechism in Latin. Finally, a church absolute and sovereign, 
which determined for all, great and small, the limits of 
thought, of belief, and of action, such was, from our own 
point of view, the condition of the Middle Ages." 

The neglect of the common people was a notable and 
lamentable defect in the educational system of the Middle 
Ages as no great eiTort was made to elevate and enlighten 
them by education. The Roman Catholic Church and its 
hierarchy, who were in control of educational affairs in those 
centuries, have always been antagonistic to the education of 
the masses, considering intelligent lay-members a source of 
danger for the supremacy of the pope. Painter, in reviewing 
the institutions operated for educational purposes in those 
centuries, says: "The ecclesiastical schools were designed 
chiefly for candidates for the priesthood; the parochial 
schools fitted the young for church-membership ; the burgher 
schools were intended for the commercial and artisan classes 
of the cities; knightly education gave training to chivalry. 
Thus the laboring classes were left to toil on in ignorance 
and want; they remained in a dependent and servile con- 
dition, their lives unillumined by intellectual pleasures. If 
here and there, as claimed by Roman Catholic writers, 
popular schools were established, they were too few in number 
and too weak in influence to deserve more than a passing 
mention." 

It cannot be denied, however, that schools existed in the 
fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, but in general their con- 
dition was very dismal, and the knowledge they imparted 
was insignificant. The monks of Franciscan and Dominican 
orders, who, as a rule, were the professors at the universi- 
ties, were not seeking the welfare of the people, but en- 
deavored to establish their sovereignty and to accumulate 
riches in order to live a life of luxury. The priests in 
the cities were too indolent to teach the children, but would 
hire drill-masters, men, as a rule, who were incapable of 
gaining their livelihood in any other way, men without 
knowledge or educational training, and therefore, incompe- 



lutheb's influence on populab education. 197 

tent to conduct a well-regulated school. They would make 
the children commit to memory the Ten Commandments, 
the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and several hymns by constant 
repetition and rehearsing. The education of the youth in 
the country was wholly neglected; the children were en- 
tirely ignorant of even the most necessary points of the 
Christian doctrines. The only thing they were conversant 
with were the ceremonies prescribed for public worship. 
Such is the result when the Church neglects popular Chris- 
tian education. 

Luther's Impression of the State of Affairs in the 

Schools of His Time. 

These were the conditions found by Luther in 1528 during 
his visitation of the churches and schools of Saxony, and they 
caused him to cry out in the preface to the Small Catechism 
which he was constrained to write: "Alas, what manifold 
misery I beheld! The common people, especially in the 
villages, know nothing at all of Christian doctrine; and 
many pastors are quite unfit and incompetent to teach. Yet 
all are called Christians, have been baptized, and enjoy the 
use of the Sacraments although they know neither the Lord's 
Prayer, nor the Creed, nor the Ten Commandments, and 
live like the poor brutes and irrational swine. O ye bishops I 
How will ye ever render account to Christ for having so 
shamefully neglected the people!" 

When Luther perceived this state of affairs, it was clear 
to him that a godless home and a worthless class of edu- 
cators were the cause of the downfall of Church and State, 
and that a solid foundation for both could be laid only by 
an efficient popular Christian education of the children in 
home and school. 

Luther Urges Home-Training. 

With resistless energy Luther therefore impressed upon 
parents their obligation to bring up their children in the 
nurture and admonition of the Lord. He insisted upon 
home-training. His writings show that he had a clear con- 
ception of the duties of parents towards their children. He 



198 lutheb's influence on popular education. 

admonishes them to honor holy wedlock as a divine insti- 
tution and to look upon their children as precious gifts 
of God, as lovely fruits of marriage, strengthening the bond 
of love. He tells them that God has entrusted the children 
He has given them to their parental care, and urges them on, 
by adducing all possible reasons, to do their duty for the 
benefit of the individual, for the Church, and for the 
commonwealth. He also reminds them of the dreadful 
Judgment Day, when a strict account of their work would 
be demanded, and their wilful negligence would be punished. 
"Children," he writes, "are the most lovely fruits and power- 
ful bonds of marriage, and confirm and preserve the bond 
of love." "Married people should remember that they can 
perform no better and no more useful work for the glory 
of God, for the benefit of both Church, and State, aye, for 
themselves and their children, than by properly bringing up 
their children." "It is to be sadly deplored that we all 
live as though God had given us children merely for our 
pleasure or amusement, and servants that we should employ 
them like a cow or an ass, for work only, or as though all 
we were to do with those who are subject to our authority 
were to satisfy our wantonness, and that it need not concern 
us what they learn or how they live; and no one is willing 
to see that this is the command of the Supreme Majesty, 
who will most strictly call us to account and punish us 
for it." 

He also shows what great evil results if parents neglect 
to train their children: "Think what deadly injury you are 
doing if you are negligent in this matter, if you fail to 
bring up your child to a life of usefulness and piety, and 
how you thus bring down upon yourself God's wrath and 
eternal damnation,' even though you be otherwise ever so 
pious and holy. And because this is disregarded, God so 
fearfully punishes the world that there is no discipline, 
government, or peace, of which we all complain, while we 
do not see that it is our fault; for we have spoiled and dis- 
obedient children and subjects because we do not train them 
as we should." 



lutheb's influence on populab education. 199 

* 

But considering how unfit rtiost of the parents were to 
teach their children even the elements of Christian doctrine, 
as well as of secular knowledge, and thinking of their 
homes with their surroundings, realizing, too, that they werd 
not even aware of their responsibility in this matter, or 
that slothful parents would wilfully neglect their children 
and let them grow up without proper instruction, or spoil 
them by undue indulgence, Luther felt that it was nec- 
essary to establish common schools, which the magistrates 
should provide, and urged the reorganization and reformation 
of those already existing. In so doing, he not only pointed 
out the glaring defects of the schools of his time, deploring 
their inefficiency, but also clearly showed a way of laying 
a solid foundation of an effective educational system, which 
should begin with the common school for boys and girls of 
all classes of the population, and culminate in a systema- 
tizing of the plan and methods of the college and university. 
His system of education comprised : 1. The primary schools ; 
2. the secondary schools; 3. the universities. For all he 
introduced graded instruction, and improved the course of 
study, as well as the methods, which are to this day standards 
for educational science. 

Luther Demands School-Training. 

Upon parents and ministers, as well as upon the officials 
of the State, he vigorously impressed their obligation to 
provide for the education of the young, and to avail them-« 
selves of the opportunity to send them to school. In his two 
most prominent pedagogical writings, his "Letter to the 
Mayors and Aldermen of All Cities of Germany in Behalf 
of Christian Schools" and his "Sermon on the Duty of 
Sending Children to School," and also in his "Tischreden,*' 
he not only maps out the plan of studies and application 
of the most important methods of teaching, but demands 
an education in schools, a thorough school-training, not only 
of the children of the rich, or the upper classes, but of 
every child. 

To the objection of those who insisted upon teaching and 
training their children at home only or at inadequate schools 



200 lutheb's influence on populab education. 

he answered : "But each one, you say, may educate and train 
his own sons and daughters. To which I reply: We see 
indeed the sad results of such teaching and training. Even 
when carried to the highest point, and if attended with suc- 
cess, it exhibits nothing more than that the pupils, in some 
measure, acquire a forced external propriety of manners; 
in other respects they remain dunces, knowing nothing, and 
not able to give advice or aid. But were they instructed 
in schools or elsewhere by thoroughly trained male and 
female teachers, who are competent to teach the languages, 
other arts, and history, then the pupils would become con- 
versant with the world's history, and acquire a knowledge 
of the world, and see how each city, kingdom, prince, man 
and woman fared, and thus be able to comprehend, as in 
a mirror, the character, life, counsels, undertakings, suc- 
cesses, and failures of mankind from the beginning of days. 
Equipped with this knowledge, they could regulate their 
views and order their course of life in the fear of Gk)d. . . . 
But the training that is given at home is expected to make 
us wise through our own experience. Before that can take 
place, we shall die a hundred times." And such education 
as he demanded for the youth should not be given to boys 
only, but also to girls. "Would to God," Luther exclaims, 
"that each town had also a girls' school, in which girls 
might be taught the Gospel!" 

It is evident that Luther intended to establish the school 
as the principal agency for the diffusion of knowledge, and 
therefore he directed the eyes of the mayors and the nobility, 
as well as the attention of all parents, to this public insti- 
tution. 

Luther wanted the school not only to teach the Word of 
God and to mold the individual character, but it should also 
shape the social conditions. Conformably to this, he pre- 
sented two reasons therefor, whenever he urged the establish- 
ment and maintenance of schools. One of these was, that 
the welfare of the State and the social conditions for the 
future should be shaped through the medium of instruction, 
and lie other was the perpetuation and advancement of the 



lutheb's influence on popular education. 201 

Church. Unlike the Roman Catholic clergy, Luther did not 
seek his own interest, nor solely the interest of the Church, 
but regarding secular government as a divine institution 
and the Church as the bride-elect of Christ, he sou^t the 
welfare of each in its own station. Referring to this, he 
says: "Thus, also, in a secular office you can serve your 
sovereign or country better by training children than by 
building castles and cities. . . . For what good can these do 
without learned, wise, and pious people? . . . When schools 
[Christian schools such as they should be] prosper, the 
Church remains righteous and her doctrine pure. . . . Young 
pupils and students are the seed and source of the Church. 
When we are dead and gone, whence would come our suc- 
cessors, if not from the school? For the sake of the Church 
we must have and maintain schools." 

Luther Demands Religious Schools. 

Luther knew, however, that if the school-training was 
to achieve the desired results, and be an important factor in 
advancing civil righteousness and perpetuating the Church, 
a thorough religious training was an absolute necessity. He 
was aware of the fact that, even if the boundaries of science 
would be extended in every direction, and if knowledge would 
be universally diffused throughout the world, the advance- 
ment of public and private morality would not be achieved 
unless a thorough religious instruction were made the foun- 
dation of all secular branches. He was convinced that science 
without a religious basis would only increase vice and crime, 
and that dishonesty and corruption would prevail. 

Luther, therefore, desired the establishment of sphools in 
which all training was based upon the Word of God. He 
knew that, by urging this, he was seeking the welfare of 
the State as well as of the Church. Religion, true religion, 
founded upon the Scripture alone, is not only of supreme 
benefit to every individual, it is also the means of welding 
together society (a community), a safeguard of morals, and 
the most powerful incentive to perform one's duty. It is 
the foundation of Church and State. It was an established 



202 lutheb's ixfluence on popular education. 

fact with Luther that learning and eloquence, arts and 
sciences, were of little value without religious training. 

This he expressed on various occasions: "See to it in 
the first place," he says, "that your children are instructed 
in spiritual things. Give them first to God, and then let 
them learn their secular duties." "Children should be in- 
structed in everything pertaining to God. They should be 
taught to know the Lord Jesus Christ, and constantly to 
bear in mind how He has suffered for us, what He has done, 
and what He has promised to do." "Above all, in schools of 
whatever description, the chief and most common lesson 
should he the Scripture, . . . Where the Holy Scriptures do 
not rule, I advise no one to send his child. Everything must 
perish where God's Word is not studied unceasingly," "The 
soul can do without everything except the Word of Gk)d. 
Without this it suffers want; but when it has God's Word, 
it needs nothing more." 

To make religious training possible and effective, Luther 
translated the Bible, and to furnish a course of religious 
instruction for children, he .wrote the Small Catechism, in 
the preface to which he laid down pedagogical principles. 
For this reason he advocated a thorough training for the 
office of teaching. "Whosoever is to teach others, especially 
from Holy Scriptures, and wishes rightly to understand this 
book, must first have observed, and learned to know, the 
world. . . . You should not only consider the words in your 
heart, but examine them diligently as you find them in the 
text, in order that you may understand what the Holy Ghost 
means to teach in the Holy Book." As pastors should be 
the overseers of the school, he pointed out the necessity "of 
having a knowledge of pedagogy and of having gained some 
esi)erience in teaching. "I would have no one chosen foY* 
a preacher," he says, "who has not previously been a school- 
teacher." * * 

The Duty of Sending Children to School. 

In his pedagogical letters Luther brought argument upon 
argument to induce parents to send their children to the 
AfltAUuibed schools. He reminded them of the wretchedness 



LUTHER'S INFLUENCE ON POPULAB EDUCATION. 203 

of their former condition, when they groped in darkness, 
while now the grace of God illumined their paths, which they 
should not receive in vain and thus neglect "the accepted 
time." He pointed out to them the command of the Lord 
urging and enjoining parents to instruct their children. He 
said to them: "It is indeed a sin and shame that we must 
be aroused and incited to the duty of educating our children 
and considering their highest interests, whereas nature itself 
should move us thereto, and the example of the heathen 
affords us varied instruction. . . . And what would it 
avail if we possessed and performed all else, and became 
perfect saints, if we neglect that for which we chiefly live, 
namely, to care for the young? In ray judgment there is 
no other offense that in the sight of God so heavily burdens 
the world, and deserves -such heavy chastisement, as the 
neglect to educate children." (Painter, Luther/tjH Education.) 
Luther vividly conceived the disapproval of some impious 
and slothful parents, who cared little for the welfare of their 
children nor for that of the State, and he foresaw their 
opposition to school-training. Of these he said that, for 
the welfare of the community, they ought to be compelled 
to educate their children. As the separation of Church and 
State had not been effected, he, under the prevailing cir- 
cumstances, sent a letter to the mayors of cities, telling them 
"that the welfare of the city did not consist alone in great 
treasures, firm walls, and abundant munitions of war, but 
the greatest power of a nation consisted in able citizens, 
whose intellectual power could secure, preserve, and utilize 
every treasure and advantage. Therefore they should estab- 
lish schools, and compel the citizens to maintain them, as 
they would force them to render contributions and services 
'toward bridges." Furthermore, they should compel them to 
educate their children: "I maintain that the civil authori- 
ties are under obligation to compel the people to send their 
children to school," ^ • 

. Luther also thought of the poor, who, lacking the means 
to pay tuition fees, could not give a promising boy a thorough 
education. In order to open the way to a thorough education 



{>i% ' 



204 LUTHER'S i:XFLUENCE ON POPULAB EDUCATION. 

for such poor, but promising boys, he urgfed the people to 
liberally contribute towards the maintenance of schools, and 
the rich to make substantial bequests for that purpose. He 
wrote: "Therefore let him who can watch; and wherever 
the government sees a promising boy, let him be sent to 
school. If the father is poor, let the child be aided with 
the property of the Church. The rich should make bequests 
to such objects, as some have done, who have founded 
scholarships." 

Luther Esteems the Office of Teaching. 

To impress upon everybody how much he valued popular 
education in common schools, Luther set forth the great 
importance of the office of teaching, and showed how highly 
he esteemed a pious schoolteacher. In his Tischreden he 
wrote: "A schoolmaster is as important to a city as is 
a pastor. We can do without mayors, princes, and noblemen, 
but not without schools; for these must rule the world. . . . 
Therefore schools are indispensable. And if I were not 
a preacher, there is no other calling on earth that I would 
rather have. But we must consider, not how the world 
esteems and rewards this office, but how God looks upon it." 
"J'o be brief, a diligent and pious schoolmaster, who faith- 
fully trains and educates boys, can never be sufficiently rec- 
ompensed, and no money wiU pay him, as even the heathen 
Aristotle says. Yet the calling is shamefully despised among 
us, as if it were nothing, and at the same time we pretend 
to be Christians ! If I had to resign preaching and my other 
duties, there is no office I would rather have than that of 
a schoolteacher. For I know that next to the ministry it 
is the most useful, greatest, and best; and I am not sure 
which of the two is to be preferred." "Therefore let it be 
considered one of the highest virtues on earth faithfully to 
train the children of others, which duty but very few parents 
attend to themselves." 

Luther's ideas of popular education went forth like 

a flash of lightning into the darkness of education, the 

sorry bequest of the Middle Ages, and kindled a fire in the 

of the thinking populace of Germany that spread over 



LUTHER'S INFLUENCE ON POPULAR EDUCATION. 205 

the entire world. His words were like thunderbolts arousing 
every one who heard them and pondered over them. In all 
parts of the country schools were established and maintained, 
and in order to systematize the course of teaching in the 
various schools Luther was called upon to draw up school- 
schedules and to explain the methods of teaching, which he 
cheerfully did. 

The pedagogical principles and methods laid down by 
Luther form the fundamental principles of education up 
to this day. Ditte says in his Geschichte der Erziehung, etc., 
regarding Luther's plans and methods: "If we survey the 
pedagogy of Luther in every particular, and imagine it put 
into practise in all its details, what a splendid picture the 
schools and education of the sixteenth century would present ! 
We should have courses of study, text-hooks, teachers, 
methods, principles, and modes of discipline, schools and 
school regulations, that could serve as models for our 
own age," 

Recapitulating the pedagogical principles of Luther in 
his two most important writings on this subject and the 
influence of Luther on popular education, the following 
particulars are evident: From the Word of God, which 
teaches that God wants all men to be saved and to come to 
the knowledge of the truth, Luther drew the conclusion that 
every man, woman, and child, irrespective of class or color, 
was entitled to a Christian education. Parents should there- 
fore regard their children as precious gifts of God, and 
preserve them, teach them, train them for this life, and 
provide for their eternal welfare. 

Under the prevailing conditions of non-separation of 
Church and State Luther urged the officials of both Church 
and State to provide for the education of the masses, and, to 
this end, establish and maintain Christian schools, as being 
necessary for the welfare of the State and for the perpetua- 
tion and propagation of the Church of Christ. Most em- 
phatically he pointed out that religious training must be 
the foundation of all education and instruction, and that 
religion was the source of all Christian virtues and civic 



206 ECONOMIC TEACHINGS AND INFLUENCE OF LUTHEB. 

righteousness. He therefore reorganized the existing common 
schools, the colleges and universities, introduced a graded 
school system, and improved the plans and methods of 
instruction to such an extent that they form the foundation 
of the principles of education up to modern times. He also 
touched upon the principles of a vocational school system, 
holding that every child should become conversant with the 
practical duties of life; the boys should learn a trade and 
the girls housework. He praised the office of teaching, saying 
that every teacher is worthy of high respect. He urged the 
necessity of a thorough training of every teacher, and «ince 
by virtue of his office every pastor is the overseer of the 
school, he, too, must be given the necessary training in peda- 
gogics, and get some experience in teaching. 

Giving other educators all the credit due them, an un- 
biased observer and student of the history of education is, 
nevertheless, impressed with the indisputable fact that Luther 
is the father of popular education, its principles and its 
methods, and that his influence has shaped the system of edu- 
cation throughout the civilized world up to this day. 

Do we really realize what an inheritance we have re- 
ceived from Luther and the Lutheran Reformation? 



The Economic Teachings and Influence 

of Luther. 

Rev. O. H. Pannkoke, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Gustave Schmollez, one of the greatest German econo- 
mists, claims that without the work of Luther the steam 
. engine and the resultant change in the economic life of the 
world would have been impossible. It is difficult to bring 
conclusive evidence for this contention. Development in 
history is not simple, but complex. As many brooks make 
the river, so many different impulses, sometimes widely 
apart in kind, place, and time, finally converge in a great 
change. The relation between person and environment in 
*H3onomical life is also the cause of grave dispute. Political 



ECONOMIC TEACHINGS AND INFLUENCE OF LUTHEB. 207 

and intellectual changes can frequently be traced back to 
their author. The economic life and activities of peoples 
seem to grow, often carrying man along on their crest rather 
than submitting to human direction. That is seen strikingly 
in the progress of inventions. Watt did not invent the steam 
engine to change industry. For a century English mining 
industry had set the task of finding some mechanical means 
to pump the water out of the lower levels. As the climax 
of much experimeiiting came Watt's reciprocating engine, 
crude at first, perfected as the exigencies of industry de- 
manded it. But though it is difficult, in fact, impossible, 
to trace out in detail the change in economic thought and 
development of the economic situation fiowing out of the 
Reformation, the broad, incisive infiuence of the Reformation 
on this side of life can, indeed, amply be proved. 

To some people Luther, the prophet of religious reform, 
has become also the final arbiter and authority in the round 
of secular interests that go to make the sum total of modern 
life. He is quoted on questions of government, of secular 
education, of social reform, very much in the manner in which 
in the Middle Ages the Bible and Aristotle were called upon 
to decide the contour of the globe or the history of the Franks. 
It is only natural that his dominating genius should win 
this unlooked-for recognition. However, it is imjust to him. 
History does not stand still. Generation learns from genera- 
tion, and each one is feverishly bent to push on further than 
the preceding. Any schoolboy to-day knows more of eco- 
nomics than Adam Smith and more of politics than Grotius 
or Burlemaqui. But the schoolboy's knowledge does not 
lessen the genius of those men who first clearly conceived 
the principles that to-day have become common property. 
TKe greatest man is limited by the restrictions of his time, 
and by them must he be measured. 

So Luther's thoughts on economics frequently seem 
crude to us to-day, who have enjoyed the experience of four 
hundred years of unparalleled commercial expansion and 
industrial development. They are not systematized into 



208 ECONOMIC TEACHINGS AXD INFLUENCE OF LUTHEB. 

a unity, but lie scattered throughout his writings. It is well 
to group them to gain a clear survey. 

The first great question in economics is the question of 
production and consumption. Luther's scheme of production 
is agricultural. On the work of the husbandman rests pe- 
culiar blessing. His is the oldest activity of man and still 
the best. It " is not difficult to understand this interest of 
Luther. His parents were originally peasants. He himself 
had grown up on the soil. Then agriculture was in Luther's 
day without question the most important pursuit. Cities 
were small and few. Perhaps, ninety per cent, of all people 
dwelled on the land, and even the inhabitants of the cities 
engaged, in a measure, in agricultural pursuits, as many 
city charters humorously show forbidding above a certain 
age pigs to be turned loose in the streets, and similar re- 
strictions. 

But though Luther emphasized agriculture, he avoided 
a mistake common in his day, t. e., to counsel a return to 
the land, leaving all other pursuits. That was in the pro- 
gram of many of the radicals of those days as it has been 
the panacea of so many Utopian reformers before and since. 
According to Luther, the artisans, the merchants, the master 
craftsmen, all serve their useful purpose in the world, though 
many of their number through selfishness abuse the good 
will of their fellow-beings. 

In a progressive scheme of production a division of labor 
is essential. It first gives opportunity to develop the in- 
dustrial activities of a people to their highest point of 
efficiency by assigning to each member of the community 
his specific task in which he must become proficient. Adam 
Smith's classic example of the English needle industry is 
commonly cited in text-books. Luther spoke no less clearly 
on the matter than did Adam Smith, though he used the 
simple, homely language of the common man to point his 
lesson. He draws his illustrations also from the needle 
industry', not from the makers, but from the users of the 
needle, the tailors, and states that in France, where one 
man is assigned to the coat, another to the vest, another 



ECONOMIC TEACHINGS AND INFLUENCE OF LUTHEB. 209 

to the trousers, they can do their work much quicker and 
better than when one man is obliged to make the whole suit. 

Aside from the resources of nature and the skill and 
organizatipn of man, production rests on capital and credit. 
Capital in modem days has opened the bowels of the earth, 
drawing forth her treasures for the use of man. Capital has 
reared the modem industrial city with its dense population, 
its busy factories multiplying the productiveness of man 
a millionfold, its wonderful inventions. Capital has en- 
larged the narrow village outlook of man until to-day the 
ends of the world are brought together as the markets of 
the industrial nations. What does Luther say of capital and 
credit? The discussion of the productiveness of money con- 
tinued throughout the medieval canon law. Money was held 
to be unproductive, and, therefore, to take interest was con- 
sidered sinful. It was with Roman churchmen a thoroughly 
academic theory far removed from the actual conditions of 
life. But it was the rule of the all-powerful Church, and 
therefore held sway. Luther, however, basing himself on 
Luke 6, 35, maintains that loans ought to be granted freely, 
without the charge of interest; for if interest is taken, the 
welfare of the neighbor is. not sought. In like spirit he is 
opposed to granting credit, and holds the best state to be 
creditless. If credit is granted, no certain time ought to be 
set for repayment, out of consideration for the creditor. 
Later in life Luther did, indeed, concede that 5 or 6 per cent, 
interest might not be absolutely wrong. 

At this point Luther has been severely attacked. And one 
familiar in any way with the growth of modem industrial 
society is not likely to underestimate the importance of 
capital and credit in bringing about the wonderful age of 
iron^and steel. But is it historically justified to judge Luther 
in the sixteenth century by the facts dominant in the 
twentieth? Hardly. Loans in Luther's day were mostly 
for use and not for investment. Through them the hard 
lot of the impoverished peasants was made still harder. 
Through them the struggling artisans were drawn into 

Pour Hundred Years. 14 



210 ECONOMIC TEACHINGS AND INFLUENCE OF LUTHER. 

a quagmire of hopeless indebtedness. Luther lived, indeed, 
in the beginning of the commercial expansion and the 
stupendous increase of money and capital. But as is always 
the case in such revolutions, the evils are paramount at first. 
Prices rise exorbitantly as money becomes cheap. The poor 
bear the burden as wages and returns for their activities 
progress only haltingly, and the ready remedy for an empty 
purse is the usurious loan, which only makes their lot the 
worse. To inveigh against such loans was, indeed, the 
soundest social and economic policy. To see the importance 
of investment capital and credit in our day requires, indeed, 
much technical study and experience. In Luther's day it 
was just beginning to be understood. 

Production is carried on for consumption. The theory 
of consumption materially affects the possibility of pro- 
duction. At this point Luther radically departed from the 
medieval ideal, and the importance of his departure cannot 
be overstated. The Middle Age conception was negative 
over against the world. It was ascetic. To forego the wealth, 
beauty, and comfort of the world in self-imposed poverty 
and self-inflicted pain was the theme written by the Church 
on every interest of life. Luther substituted for it an 
interest in the things which God had created. If God made 
them. He made them for a good purpose, and man ought to 
use them according to the will of God. Luther si)eaks out 
against the luxury in eating and drinking and clothes, which 
seems to have been a common evil of the time. Back of 
these warnings lies, however, at all times, that broad, well- 
balanced, healthy joy in the things which the heavenly 
Pather made for the proper use of His children. Instead of 
world-flight as contained in the ascetic view, there is con- 
tained here world-conquest. That precisely has been an un- 
derlying idea of human activity since the Reformation. It 
was carried out by the age of discoveries, by the progress 
of science, by the multiplication of inventions, by the 
development of the economic resources of the globe. Back 
of all of them stands Luther's healthy, sound view to use 
all the good things of God's creation. 



ECONOMIC TEACHINGS AND INFLUENCE OF LUTHER. 211 

Moreover, the positive theory of life stops not with the 
use and consumption of things. It is more potent even in 
the field of progressive production. If man no more is urged 
to flee the world and honest labor in a life of fruitless con- 
templations, what shall he do? Luther's answer is pointed. 
He shall serve his God by honestly doing his duty in what- 
ever calling God has placed him. He shall work in the great 
family of workers on earth for the sake of the common 
welfare and the common progress. Be his work ever so 
humble, God's blessing rests on it if it is faithfully done. 
There is dynamic in this simple proposition, the dynamic 
which has inspired man in four short centuries to advance 
farther industrially than in all the centuries which preceded. 

We turn now to a discussion of the next important di- 
vision of economics, a discussion of money and exchange, 
and with that, value and price. Hutten was sponsor for 
a novel remedy to alleviate the social suffering of the day. 
He proposed to do away with all money. With him sided 
the radicals at Muenster. Luther was not in sympathy with 
this proposal. He granted the useful purpose which money 
serves in facilitating exchange. He had, of course, no 
developed theory on the question of standard or coinage, 
questions which did not meet with consideration in those 
days. But Luther knew the evils of bad money quite clearly. 
The right to coin in those days was a so-called regal or royal 
prerogative, granted at times to princes, cities, in few 
instances to merchants. For them it was a welcome oppor- 
tunity of gain to debase the coinage. Thomas Gresham 
commonly receives credit for formulating the theory that 
bad or debased money invariably drives out good. Luther 
understands the theory quite well, though he lived a quarter 
of a century before the great English financier. 

Luther does not see the purpose and value of trade, 
domestic and foreign, as we see it to-day. He stands, in that 
respect, completely on the ground of the schoolmen. They 
conceived of trade that one or the other party invariably 
was the loser. It sounds plausible enough, and is still the 
working principle of the traveling hucksters in Bussia and 



212 ECONOMIC TEACHINGS AND INIXUENCE OF LI3THKB. 

Turkey. In a developed commercial community it is quite 
clear, however, that both parties are the gainers, and that 
only on that basis can social life continue. Luther was 
always more or less suspicious of merchants and merchant 
transactions, and warns them time and again of the danger 
and temptations of their caUing. Especially is he opposed 
to foreign trade, which was largely in the hands of Portugal 
in his day. He wants a law against foreign imports, and 
believes the money which travels out for spices, silks, and 
other things might much better stay in Germany. How 
common that sentiment was in those days is seen from the 
drastic action of the Diet of Nuremberg, 1522, which 
actually forbade German merchants from going to Portugal 

Closely akin is the question of value and price. It was 
a sore spot in that day. Prices had soared beyond all reach 
in the beginning of the sixteenth century. Spices esi)ecially 
had, in instances, increased 2,000 per cent, in price. On 
every hand arose complaints and demands for drastic action. 
In response to that popular excitement the Diet of Nurem- 
berg took up the matter, and appointed a commission very 
much in the way in which our Government appoints com- 
missions to look into the rise of prices. The blame was 
thrown on monopolies and merchants, and Luther joined in 
the common condemnation. Some blame attaches to thenn, 
no doubt; the greater, perhaps, to the high-handed methods 
and practises of the monopolists. A deeper and graver cause 
for the rapid rise in prices was the rapid increase in precious 
metals than the development of the Bohemian and Saxon 
silver mines and the influx of foreign gold. Money became 
cheap and prices rose. The only remedy for the situation 
was gradual readjustment through competition. Luther, in 
common with other men of his time, desired the government 
to fix prices according to equity. He realizes the difficulty 
of determining "the equity," especially with the continued 
fluctuations in the value of one article in comparison with 
all others. But he nevertheless favors a definite state- 
fixed price. 

The last division in economics from the social stand- 



ECONOMIC TEACHINGS AND INFLUENCE OF LUTHER. 213 

point is the most important. To have the national income 
distributed justly among the groups that helped to create 
that income has been the motive for more than one bloody 
rising in history. It played a prominent role also in the 
popular upheaval of Reformation days. As for the workmen, 
Luther counsels maximum wage laws, condemning the selfish- 
ness of the workers in seeking ever higher wages. Modern 
statistical investigation has brought out the fact that the 
better strategic position of the employer invariably enables 
him to take care of himself, and that the employee needs 
the protection of the State to enable him to barter success- 
fully for a fair wage. However, this truism did not become 
accepted except through the rise of the common man to 
a position of comparative political and economic independ- 
ence which came only within the last century. The Refor- 
mation contributed largely to bring it about. 

Nor is Luther a one-sided defendant of the possessing 
classes. His implacable hatred of the laziness of the clerics 
of the old church arose in religious interest, but its influence 
was economic. It helped to restrict a parasitic class enjoy- 
ing a large income and doing no labor. It was thus a very 
direct step toward a more equitable distribution. The 
French Revolution was caused by the unfair division of 
wealth, the clergy holding a major share. A casual glance 
through the grievances of the German nation before the 
Reformation shows how large an issue the selfsame question 
was then. 

In the same way does he speak against the luxury and 
excesses of the nobility and the wealthy merchants, and he* 
holds up to them the crying nepds of the poor. He wants 
the wealth distributed according to needv With different 
classes the standard of living is different. One needs more 
than the other. But their needs ought all to be supplied. 

To attain these reforms Luther favors a great extension 
of state activities. Before the Reformation the Church in 
its exteiaial and internal courts had dealt with many of thesfe 
questions such as usury, just prices, and others. In Luther's 
conception of things the Church had nothing to do with 



214 ECONOMIC TEACHINGS AND INFLUENCE OF LUTHER. 

them, as they were purely secular. In its place stepped the 
State. It ought to control prices. In order to do that the 
bettePj it can itself buy up large quantities of food, and 
store them to throw them on the market when prices are 
high. The example of Joseph's com monopoly in Egypt 
wins his unqualified approval, and he believes the same 
policy quite feasible in his day, as, indeed, it was, for in 
many cases cities did store grain to put it on the market 
in times of scarcity. In like manner the State shall control 
wages and labor, determining them justly for all parties 
concerned. Lastly, consumption shall fall under the control 
of the State. It shall curtail excessive eating and drinking, 
the squandering of money on household and clothing, forbid 
the import of too many luxuries, and in every way see that 
its citizens lead a frugal, well-regulated life. The money 
derived from the secularization of monastic properties Luther 
wants the State to use for building up bridges, roads, public 
buildings, and the education of the young. 

In the reform programs of Reformation days, and before, 
communism played a very important role. Luther never 
was greatly impressed with the idea. He did not agree with 
the claim that it is Christian. He pointed out that the 
early Jerusalem communism was not obligatory, and there- 
fore could not be adduced as a binding rule. He points out 
that Christ had private property. As a practical question 
Luther considers communism the mortal enemy of honest 
labor. 

It remains to point to some larger considerations involved 
in the question, and sum up. The discovery and colonization 
of foreign lands was a very prominent cause in that great 
economic activity following the Reformation. Hand in 
hand with it went the increase of precious metals, which was 
so necessary to finance the large undertakings characteristic 
of modern industry. Earlier than these was the use of the 
national spirit, and the gradual growth of national organiza- 
tion and laws to foster the industries of the various coun- 
tries. These three factors were active before the Reforma- 
tion, and in a measure contributed to the success of the 
Reformation movement. 



LUTHER A LOVEE OF NATURE. 215 

The definite organic break with the old system did not 
come, however, until Luther burned the papal laws before 
the Elster Gate in 1520. The old Church was not an intel- 
lectual or theological system. It was an organized State 
superimposed upon the civil State, claiming precedence, and 
arrogating final control over every interest that may enter 
the human breast. Its spirit w^as reactionary and other- 
worldly, its ideals thoroughly impractical. If progress in 
harnessing this world to useful purpose should come, it could 
come only upon its ruin. There lies the great contribution 
of Luther to the economic advance of the world. It is not 
lessened by the fact that other currents, strong currents, 
were converging toward that point. It is not lessened by 
the many traces of medievalism in his economic thought 
which make him a true son of his time. It is not lessened 
by the host of others who thought and planned and worked 
with him to the same end. He was the leader, the eldest 
son of a tempestuously great period. He stepped out of 
a world of fanciful dreams and romantic exploits into a world 
of useful purpose. And as the world ever gives greater honor 
to the pioneer who bears the danger and hardships of un- 
explored lands than to the settler who succeeds him, so the 
greater honor belongs not to these later generations who 
carried on their shoulders the industrial advance of the 
world. It belongs to him who blazed the trail: Martin 
Luther. 



Luther a Lover of Nature. 

Rev. J. W. Theiss, Los Angeles, Cal. 

It would have been a psychological phenomenon had 
a mind as broad as Luther's and gifted with such unusual 
versatility, shown no interest in the pages of God's wonderful 
book of nature, had the starry vault of heaven, the velvet 
of the lily, and the glow of the rose never spoken to him 
the silent, but eloquent language of the almighty God. 

But we need not guess at Luther's love of nature, for 



216 LUTIIEB A LOVEB OF NATURE. 

it is sufficiently recorded by . contemporary writers, and is 
evident, above all, from the writings of the Reformer. 

Luther knew nature. We must not judge of his knowledge 
of nature by merely thinking of the scenery which he saw 
on his journey to Italy, his travels through Southern Ger- 
many, his visit to beautiful Heidelberg, and his forced 
stay in the lofty Wartburg and the caatle of Coburg, but we 
must take into account his keenness of ohservation and the 
nature of his labors in studying and translating the Bible, 
which is brimful of nature-references. 

Now as to the countries he saw, — beautiful Italy, the 
lofty Alps, the romantic Thuringia, in whose woods and fields 
he roved after school with his well-beloved brother Jacob, — 
it is true, he saw them mostly at a time when his mind was 
filled with grave theological thoughts, when he endured in- 
ward conflicts and outward strife, and was in no mood to 
fully contemplate and enjoy nature. He had the same ex- 
perience as our American pioneers, who almost overlooked 
the surrounding beauties of nature because their minds 
were bent on keeping the wolf from their doors, and their 
eyes were searching for the lurking Indians instead of the 
flowers in the woods. 

Still, the writings of Luther show that even this stormy 
period of his life did not completely exclude his "communion 
with the visible forms" of nature. " His comparatively more 
quiet years, however, when he lived his married life in the 
cloister by the city-moat of Wittenberg and tilled his own 
garden, or betook himself to his 'little oasis," or to the 
little farm at Zuelsdorf, made up for this loss, and many 
a moment was then given to observing the wonders of nature, 
and to praising the pQwer of God in every blade of grass. 

As to his task of translating the Bible, with all the 
mention of so many birds, beasts, insects, flowers, and trees, 
it could not but rouse his attention to nature round ab'out 
him, and lead him to compare Oriental plants and animals 
with those of Germany. 

In fact, to find a correct translation for some Hebrew 
words designating flowers, etc., often gave Luther considerable 



LUTHER A LOVER OF NATURE. 217 

trouble. On one occasion his knowledge of the hyacinth is 
too limited. He is puzzled because the Bible speaks of its 
color as being blue, whilst Luther is acquainted with none 
but the yellow kind. On another occasion he blankly con- 
fesses his ignorance of a certain root mentioned in the 
Hebrew text. Now all these many occasions for weighing 
terms and finding accurate translations were certainly con- 
ducive to close observation and nature-study. 

Just to illustrate how often he mentions nature, and 
how remarkably well he knew it, take, for example, what he 
says of birds. The swallow he describes as to its color, its 
noisy twitter, its uselessness, and its aggressiveness; "for," 
says he, "it molests the cows." Of the sparrows he says that 
they are a very pest to the peasants, robbing, stealing, de- 
vouring anything they can lay hold of: oats, barley, wheat, 
rye," apples, pears, cherries, and so on; birds that rapidly 
multiply, and whose entire song consists of "Scrip, scirp." 
The cuckoo he describes as a dirty bird, which sucks the eggs 
of other birds, lays his own into their nests, and expects them 
to hatch them. The call of the cuckoo is merely his own 
name, whilst his hahitat is generally found where the 
lark is. Of the peacock he reports that it is a very jealous 
bird, and he classes it with doves, pheasants, siskins, finches, 
wrens, thistle-birds, robins, and thrushes among the "proud 
birds." Of crows and blackbirds he gives it as his opinion 
that they enjoy their own cawing. He shows how birds 
during winter lie apparently dead in nests, stone-rifts, crev- 
ices, and hollow places along river banks, till spring calls 
them to new life. He tells of the ostrich how hard-hearted 
it is, not attending to hatching or tending of its offspring, 
and how it hides its head in the sand. He knows how owls 
and bats shun the light, and how the magpie, by persistent 
effort, is taught to talk. He speaks of the filthy nest of the 
hoopoe and of the cleanness of the dove. He describes 
pigeons "with white shining wings like silver, but beautir 
fully green and golden on the back, where the wings meet, 
birds without meanness." He mentions the keen eyes of 
the falcon and the circling of the hawk, who tries to take 



218 I.UTHEB A LOVEB OF ^fATUSE. 

the chicks that hide under their mother's wings. He has 
watched the buzzard looking for carrion, and has seen the 
pigeon, sparrow, chicken, and yellow-breast pick up the seed, 
of the sower from the furrows. He is acquainted with the 
sweet song of the birds and also with the senseless chatter 
of the parrot. He knows well the fowler's art, who snares 
the birds with nets, grain, and decoy-birds. 

Space forbids the enumeration of the multitude of things 
in nature mentioned in Luther's writings. He has watched 
the clumsiness of cows and the helpless movements of hogs, 
eager to feed, which finally fall into the trough. He has 
noticed how spiders catch flies, and how they extract poison 
from the very rose which yields honey to the bee. He knows 
the gentleness and helplessness of sheep, and minutely de- 
scribes their ways. 

And as he studies animals, so likewise plants. He knows 
the labor of the peasant and the task of the wine-grower, the 
preparation of the soil, the pruning and suckering of vines. 
He expresses his surprise how the bare country around Wit- 
tenberg produces good wine, and how flowers which cling 
to the naked rock yield honey to the bee. In short, the 
observant reader of Luther's works cannot but notice how 
well the Reformer is acquainted with nature. 

Just one example to show how closely he observes. Of 
hens he writes : "There is no other bird, indeed, scarcely any 
other animal, which so warmly and seriously takes care of 
its young ones, or chicks, as does the hen. Behold how she 
lives and acts for her chicks, how she even changes her voice 
and the way of calling them when she leads them. See how 
she behaves and spreads her wings, when you come near 
her chicks, yea, how she flies at you. No other animal has 
such warmth of heart as the hen." 

But Luther's eyes have not only seen these smaller things 
in nature, quite often he also speaks of the most majestic 
handiworks of the Creator : the sun, the moon, and the 
stars, the mountains and the clouds, the eclipses, the thunder- 
storms, the tides, and the earthquakes. 

But how did Luther regard nature? Was his mind 



- - ' 



I.UTHEB A LOVER OF NATUBE. 219 

poisoned with the hypotheses of a spurious science which 
tries to deprive the Creator of His glory, and put a halo 
around mud? By no means. Luther regards nature not as 
an independent force, but as a creature obeying God, always 
and everywhere under His rule and guidance. He does not, 
like some of our foolish-wise naturalists, hold the "laws of 
nature" to be unchangeable regulations to which God Him- 
self must submit, but merely rules of His own sovereign 
devising, according to which He ordinarily guides the uni- 
verse, but which He at once with sovereign power casts aside 
when they do not suit His purposes. 

Speaking of the solid mountains and the mighty sea, 
Luther exclaims: "God possesses the art of drying up the 
ocean, as though a bridge were thrown across it, and to make 
the soft water as hard as a wall, whilst, on the other hand, 
the mountains become as soft as a lake or river." 

. That nature is God's creation, a manifestation of His 
power, wisdom, and goodness, a precious gift even no)v, after 
it has been sadly marred by sin, is the underlying thought 
of Luther's love of nature. This love is no idolatry, no mis- 
guided worship of blind forces, but a healthy, noble, reverent 
way of looking at God's creation. He truly "looks through 
nature up to nature's God," and this clear vision in the 
light of the Word of God makes his utterances regarding 
nature sane and safe. 

Luther's writings so abound with splendid passages show- 
ing how he sees God's handiwork in all nature that it is 
difficult for that reason to make merely a selection. See 
how reverently he speaks of this matter in the following 
words: "In short, in all, even the smallest of creatures, yea, 
in their members also, the omnipotence of God is plainly 
seen, and great miracles are laid before us. For what man, 
be he ever so powerful, wise, or holy, can bring forth a fig- 
tree out of a fig, or make one fig out of another, or from 
one cherry-stone make another or create a cherry-tree? Or 
how can he even know how God creates, preserves, and multi- 
plies everything?" 

Again he says : "One cannot grasp God, and yet one feels 



220 iUTHER A LOVER OF NATURE. 

His presence, for everywhere He shows Himself and makes 
Himself known, and He proves Himself a benevolent Creator, 
who blesses us with all good gifts, to which sun and moon, 
heaven and earth, and all the fruits of the soil bear witness." 

Because Luther so clearly beholds God in nature, he is 
convinced that it is the duty of every creature to praise the 
Lord. The Christian's principal aim and purpose, he says, 
should be to praise God, to magnify Him "as the sole Creator 
and the Lord of all that is in heaven and earth; not only 
because He has created us, but because He has made every- 
thing for our service and benefit. Sun and moon must give 
us light by day and night; the heavens must give us rain, 
clouds, shade, and dew; the earth must yield us various 
plants and animals; the water must provide us with fish 
and countless necessities; the air must give us fowls and 
our breath; the fire must warm us, and serve us in many 
other ways. And who can enumerate all gifts of God ? One 
cannot better state them, nor otherwise, than in these brief 
words: "The works of the Lord are great." Luther is sure 
that the works and benefits of God cannot be counted "though 
one would count from now on to all eternity," and cannot be 
named "though all leaves and blades of grass were tongues.^ 

At the same time he knows well that nature now, in 
consequence of the fall of man, is greatly corrupted and 
not as beautiful as when it came from the hands of the 
Creator. Of the sun„ of whose glory he so often speaks in 
glowing terms, he makes this remarkable statement: "The 
sun is not at all as pretty, bright and clear now as it was 
when it was created, but through man's fault is about half 
dark, rusty, and soiled." He is convinced that on Judgment 
Day God will cleanse and burnish the sun "that it will be 
brighter and clearer than in the beginning." 

Despite all the ravages which sin has made on nature, 
Luther is sure that it still speaks to us of God, that it is 
worthy of daily contemplation, and that the book of nature 
contains many lessons for us aU. He admonishes us to learn 
the articles of resurrection when we see the sower casting 
seed into the ground, which becomes grain in due time. He 



LUTHER A LOVER 



Af nature. 221 



writes: "With this farming which I am now doing, with 
my sowing and planting, God would teach me the work 
which He will some time perform upon me." 

The testimony which nature gives to the existence and 
benevolence of God, according to Luther, loudly cries out 
against imbelief. He writes: "In such a weighty matter 
little testimony or small witnesses would not be sufficient; 
here the beautiful, high, lofty heavens with the noble sun 
and moon and all the stars must take the stand. Here also 
the earth with all her plants, with all birds and beasts, and 
the great wide sea with all its fish, and everything that stirs 
therein, must appear for their God, and give testimony 
against the ungodly to uphold His divine glory and justice, 
and to confirm His judgments." 

Luther shows that human reason and wisdom can yet of 
itself get so far that it argues, "although feebly," that there 
must be one, eternal, divine being which has created all 
things, governs and preserves them, because there are such 
excellent creatures in heaven and earth, so wonderful, orderly, 
and firmly established, moved and governed by His hand. 
Reason must, says he, admit that they did not get there 
by accident, and that they cannot move of their own 
accord, but that there must needs be a Creator and Lord 
by whom all things are made and governed as St. Paul shows 
Rom. 1, 20. He is therefore quite sure that all who live 
and breathe, and fail to perceive their God, are without 
excuse for their agnosticism. He tersely says: "There is 
no cow, no calf, no sheep, when it bawls and bellows, that 
does not bawl over all the godless as over God's enemies, 
who are not worthy to enjoy them to their benefit, yea, to 
eat a single morsel of bread, or to take a drink of water." 
He exclaims : "O God, what a fearful and terrible judgment 
will befall the world b^ause it does not see these miracles! 
Note at this point what the world really is, what a devilish 
thing it is! It is hardened and deluded, and does not see 
God's miracles." 

Luther is angered at the ungodly world, which denies the 
Creator. The fall of man, he points out, is responsible for 



222 LUTHER A LOVEB OF NATURE. 

man's deplorable blindness. He gives vent to his feelings 
in these pathetic words : "The world, after the fall of Adam, 
knows neither God nor the creatures, lives in all things 
contraiy to the glory of God, praises, honors, and glorifies 
Him not. O what fine, beautiful, cheering thoughts man 
would have had if he had not fallen! How he would have 
beheld God in all creatures I Even in the smallest and most 
ordinary flowers he would have contemplated God's omnip- 
otence, wisdom, and benevolence." Adam and all his chil- 
dren, Luther says, might have rejoiced over the creation, but 
"on account of the miserable, ruinous fall of man there is 
no such rejoicing ; on the contrary, the Creator is blasphemed 
and dishonored." 

Luther believes that the right and reverent contemplation 
of nature is decreasing more and more as sin increases and 
the end of the world draws near. He thinks that people 
before the Flood enjoyed nature better than is done now. 
Speaking of the Antediluvian people, he remarks: "They 
diligently contemplated God's creatures, both in heaven and 
on earth, and took great pleasure in them. Then there was 
more delight in a fresh, cool spring of water than there is 
now in the choicest of wines." 

Nature is crippled by sin, and man, who was fully to enjoy 
it, has fallen into sin; but nature shall be renewed and 
glorified. Luther, in strong faith and ardent hope, writes: 
"How beautiful our Lord and God has created this perish- 
able temporal kingdom, to wit, heaven and earth, and all 
that it contains! How much more beautiful will He make 
that incorruptible, eternal kingdom!" And this glorious 
new creation will never be subjected to misuse by world or 
devil. The groaning of nature will be at an end. 

Meanwhile we Christians will patiently wait and enjoy 
nature in its present form as well as we may; indeed, Luther 
says that the Christian alone can rightly enjoy nature. 

Luther is certainly a model to us in this sane Christian 
enjoyment, which consists in loving nature as God's gift 
to man, but puts the love of God and the worship of the 
"'reator far, far above it. He says: "All other things are 



LUTHER A LOVEB OF NATUBE. 223 

but chaff when compared with Christ, the Son of God. For 
He has created the heavens, the earth, and all creatures, 
whereof one might fitly sing and rejoice." Again he says: 
"Now, if I keep this in mind that God's Son was made 
man, and if I believe in Him, then all creatures appear 
a hundredfold more beautiful than they now do. You 
will truly understand what the sun, moon, stars, tree^, apples, 
and pears are if you understand that He is Lord, and that 
everything is concerned with Him." 

The "origin of the species," which is such a stumbling- 
block to the ungodly scientist, is to Luther not a mystery 
that he tries to solve by some silly hypothesis, but as clear 
as daylight: it is an arrangement of the Creator; and the 
continuance of the species is to Luther's mind an evidence 
that there is an overruling Providence. He writes: ^A cow 
always brings forth a cow, a horse, a horse, etc. No cow 
gives birth to a horse, nor a horse to a cow. Therefore it 
must incontrovertibly follow that there is something which 
governs all things. We can easily apprehend God from the 
sure and unchangeable .movement, course, and circling of 
the stars of heaven." 

Luther calls it a satanic delusion when people think they 
must search out with their benighted reason those things 
which God has clearly revealed. In speaking of the mystery 
of the resurrection of the body, he says: "Thus does Satan 
blind people that they cannot rightly see any work of God; 
again, that they do pay attention to the Word, but would 
comprehend everything with their finite minds." This is 
both sinful and foolish, says Luther, because it is absolutely 
impossible. He says: "Should you thoroughly examine into 
a single grain of seed in the field, the shock, as it were, of 
admiration would take your life's breath away. God's works 
are so infinitely superior to ours." All these remarks of 
Luther tend to show us that he does not at all agree with 
the modem infidel scientist, but sees nature as a simple, 
reverent child of God. 

Hearing all these expressions of Luther's nature-loving, 
pious heart, the question is easily answered whether or not 



224 I.UTHEB A LOVER OF NATURE. 

Luther loved nature, and it remains only to notice in what 
manner he gave expression to it. 

Luther was first and always a theologian, and does not 
give expression to his love of nature in every instance where 
a superficial student of the Bible would expect it, e. g,, in 
his commentary on the 19th Psalm. Here the reader might 
expect t^ find some glowing eulogy of nature. He will be 
disappointed, because Luther, as a trusty theologian, shows 
that these words of God do not treat of nature, but of the 
far grander glory of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, whose 
splendor outshines all the sunrises man ever beheld. 

Luther's love of nature is throughout in due subjection 
to his theology, and his knowledge of nature is fitly employed 
to illustrate the power of the Almighty. How great his love 
of nature was is readily seen from this remark: "I believe 
that in the life to come we shall have nothing else to do than 
to ponder over and admire our Creator and His creatures." 
Here in life Luther often lacked the time to fully indulge 
in his love of nature. The busy, overburdened theologian, 
who constantly studied, who preached thousands of sermons, 
translated the entire Bible, wrote great numbers of books, 
and in letters and otherwise counseled hundreds of people, 
could rarely go out into the realm of nature merely to rest, 
or to enjoy and to drink in its beauty, and we hear of but 
one instance where he went into the forest just to enjoy it. 

But Luther's love of nature, nevertheless, shows itself in 
many ways. Besides hundreds of direct references to nature, 
we often meet with splendid comparisons drawn from nature 
in his writings. The Bible, e. g,, he fitly compares to rain, 
which moistens and refreshes the earth; to a fountain, from 
which we draw living water; to a tree, which has branches, 
limbs, and twigs full of luscious fruit. He tells us that 
he had "knocked against every tree of this forest, and had 
plucked and shaken from it a few apples and pears." 

In another passage he says of the preaching of the Gospel, 
as well as of the disappointments connected with it, that it 
is *^ike the trees in springtime, when every branch is full 
of blossoms, and people wonder how they would be able to 



LUTHER A LOYEB OF NATUBE. 225 

store all the expected fruit, till a rain comes upon them, and 
the wind knocks off nine-tenths of the blossoms, and the 
remaining tenth is partly worm-eaten." 

One excellent comparison he draws in these words : "When 
the sun rises and darkens [outshines] the moon, that moon 
and stars lose their brightness, yea, are seen no longer during 
the day, because the light of the sun is too great in compari- 
son. Moon and stars would gladly give us their light, but 
the sun with his glare and brightness is too strong for them. 
Thus it is also in this matter: the prophets are the stars 
and the moon, but Christ is the Sun, and wherever He 
appears, preaches, and shines. His Word is of such importance 
that the others seem as nothing in comparison and are not 
seen aside of Him, although the moon and the stars also 
shine very brightly. Thus Moses, the Law, and the prophets 
are indeed learned and fine preachers, but compared with 
the preaching of Christ they amount to nothing." These 
and a hundred other fine comparisons from nature show 
how lovingly Luther's mind dwelt upon God's creation. 

In three renowned letters, one of them written to 
Dr. Brueck, another to his family, while he watched the 
proceedings at Augsburg from his seclusion on the Coburg, 
and the third to his beloved son Haenschen, he resorts 
altogether to nature. 

Li the letter to Dr. Brueck he speaks of stars and the 
vault of heaven and the clouds as being upheld by the hand 
of the Almighty, showing Dr. Brueck that God would like- 
wise uphold the cause of the Reformation without human aid. 

In the letter to his family written at Coburg, he face- 
tiously likens the great conclave at Augsburg to a gathering 
of blackbirds, which he noticed from his window in the 
castle, and he goes into a lengthy description of their doings. 

In the letter to his Haenschen he seeks to give his little 
hoy joy, and draws for him the very finest picture of child- 
like happiness he can possibly find, and it results in a nature- 
essay — a garden "with beautiful apples, x)ear8, cherries, and 
plums," and "a mossy place in the middle of the garden for 

Fonr Hundred Years. 15 



226 LUTHEB A LOTEB OF NATUBE. 

the children to skip about." Do not these letters argue that 
Luther was at heart an ardent lover of nature? 

If proof were wanting, the culture* of his own garden at 
Wittenberg and Zuelsdorf, where he sowed and planted for 
his recreation, would certainly show his love of nature. Once 
he asks his friend Link at Nuremberg to send various kinds 
of seed, and reports how his cucumbers and melons thrive 
*'in spite of Duke George of Saxony and. King Henry of 
England," as he playfully adds. Again he asks Link to 
send him a few pomegranates. To Spalatin he writes: 
^'I have made a garden and have dug a well. Come, and 
you shall be crowned with roses and lilies." So here is true 
love of nature. 

This is further evidenced by his choice of a pleasure- 
ground, as we might call it. Wittenberg itself was not 
a beautiful or romantic town, and the surroundings were not 
inviting. Myconius says of Wittenberg that it had "small, 
old, ugly, low, wooden houses, and resembled a village rather 
than a city." Luther himself writes: "Wittenberg lies at 
the very outskirts of civilization; if it had gone a little 
beyond, they would have been in the midst of Barbary." 
He joked about the sandhills, and wondered how God was 
able to bring forth out of the rock com and good wine. 
Yet his love of nature helped him even here to find a charming 
oasis in the midst of the desert, a place now called Luther's 
Well. A hill near the Elbe River, a mile or more from the 
Elster Gate, where a spring of the purest water bubbled, so 
pleased Luther that he eventually built him a small house 
there, and resorted occasionally to it for his studies, or to 
spend an hour with his friends. 

Luther's love of nature never flagged. His last sermon, 
held at Eisleben a few days before his death, is still rich in 
nature-love, and shows him to be a splendid observer and 
admirer of God's handiwork. 

To summarize, then, the attitude of Dr. Martin Luther 
towards nature: Luther is not a naturalist like Audubon, 
Thoreau, or Muir, not a devotee of nature and dreamer like 
Wordsworth, Bryant, or Eichendorff, but a sane Christian 



MUSIC AND THE BEFOBMATION. 227 

lover of nature, who is, first of all, a theologian, and who 
looks upon the book of nature as written by the hand of 
Almighty God to teach us His power, wisdom, and goodness. 
Luther is a true lover of nature; for him nothing in nature 
is too small to admire, and to him the heavens and the earth, 
the stars and the sea, the forests and the flowers of the field, 
the birds and the waving blades of grass alike sing the praises 
of Almighty God. 



Music and the Reformation. 

Pbof. Paul Reuteb, Teachers' Seminary, Seward, Nebr. 

The children of God have from time immemorial ex- 
pressed their religious emotions through the tonal art. It 
was the language in which the Israelites addressed Jehovah, 
playing cymbals, psalteries, and harps, and lifting up their 
voice in joyous thanksgiving. It was employed by the early 
Christians, the apostles themselves exhorting them to sing 
psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs in praise of their Re- 
deemer. It is used to-day always and everywhere in the 
service of Him who has given us this medium that we may 
thereby glorify His name. 

And whenever an upward movement was in progress in 
the Church of God, it was accompanied by a fresh outburst 
of poetry and song among the common people, proclaiming 
in jubilant tones the dawn of reviving faith. During the 
great persecutions, the blood of which became the seed of 
the Church, nothing could restrain the faithful followers of 
Christ, who suffered ignominy and death rather than renounce 
their Savior, to chant their songs in the catacom*bs and 
subterranean vaults, "the roofs reechoing," according to 
St. Ambrose, "with the cries of 'Alleluia,' which in sound 
were like the waves of the surging sea." And at the time 
of the Reformation, when the Gospel again was preached in 
its purity and fulness, the people took recourse to music 
to express the joy and gladness that filled their hearts. They 
had long been silent, and had hung their harps on the wil- 
lows. Held in the Babylon of popery for many centuries. 



228 MUSIC AND THS BEFOBHATION. 

they coiild not but mourn and sigh for deliverance. But 
when the deliverance came, and they found their freedom 
in Christ Jesus, they broke forth in a song which was like 
the shout of a warrior who, after mortal combat, has tri- 
umphed over his foe. 

And the instrument God chose as the head and front of 
the movement to restore to the people a musical service in 
keeping with the spirit of Scripture, was none other than 
the great Reformer himself, who had liberated them from 
the oppressive yoke of Antichrist. A remarkable man was 
Martin Luther, remarkable alike as a Christian, as a scholar, 
as a theologian, as the leader of the Reformation, as a poet, 
as an art-connoisseur, as a musician. Was there ever a man 
more universally gifted, and was there ever a man more 
singularly fitted to carry on in its various phases the Refor- 
mation in the New Testament Church? Before entering 
into the nature of his work, a brief reference to his musical 
education and inclinations will be appropriate. 

Being passionately fond of music, the miner's son early 
became a member of the school-choir, called Currende, and 
as such was instructed in elementary counterpoint, the duty 
of the Currendani being to assist at divine services. The 
story is well known how one day, when Luther caroled his 
partem propter Deum in the streets of Eisenach, his hearty 
singing and gentle manners made a deep impression on 
Ursula Cotta, the pious wife of the burgomaster, who took 
him in and gave him a seat at her well-filled board. Through- 
out his long life the love of music remained with him. 
Whether he was in a melancholy or in a happy mood, he 
would often gather around him his family and friends, and 
sing with them, and perform on the lute and flute. He had 
a clear, strong tenor voice, and played like a virtuoso on 
the lute, so. that on his journeys he would often attract the 
attention of the passers-by. Those who were not moved by 
a delightful masterpiece he called "coarse clogs," "only fit 
to listen to the bowlings of animals." His letters to profes- 
sional musicians show how he exalted "the noble art" above 
all other arts, placing it next to theology, and recognizing 



MUSIC AND THE BEFOBMATION. 229 

its power as an inspiring and truth-conveying aid in the work 
of the Reformation. That he was more than a practical 
musician, and possessed considerable theoretical knowledge, 
we know from the fact that he was able to detect offenses 
against strict canonic part-writing, and that he would, as 
Ratzeberger relates, rectify such passages "according to his 
own intelligence/' Only a musician well versed in art can 
enter minutely into the nature of a composition as does 
Luther with reference to an intricate motet by Josquin de 
Pres, one of the most celebrated composers of his time. 

Surely, Luther possessed the requisite musicianship to 
enable him to undertake the leadership in reforming ec- 
clesiastic music, and great things did he accomplish for the 
music of the Church and for tonal art in general; indeed, 
his influence was so far-reaching that he is recognized as 
a musical factor by leading authorities. Every encyclopedia 
records his achievements; Grove's Dictionary of Music de- 
votes two entire pages to "Luther, the Musician." 

Turning now to a discussion of the nature of his work, we 
find that it consisted chiefly in the revision of the liturgy 
and the introduction of congregational singing. Li revising 
the order of worship, Luther displayed the same sound judg- 
ment that characterized his other reforms, removing only 
what was not consistent with the changes in doctrine. In 
this he differed radically with some of the sectarians, who 
in their attitude towards the fine arts went far beyond the 
Scriptures. Being filled with antipathy to all existing 
usages, they purposed to arrest the growth of art. A fierce 
spirit of iconoclasm swept over a portion of the Reformed 
Church. Every vestige of prescribed form was renounced, 
monuments and stained glass windows destroyed, organs 
demolished,, choirs banished from their places of worship, 
and the service reduced to the baldest simplicity. In the 
century following the Reformation the Puritans took similar 
steps imder Cromwell. To such fanatics Luther replied: 
"I do not think that all arts should be trampled under foot 
by the Gospel and vanish before it, as some deluded clericals 
[Zwingli, Carlstadt, etc.] pretend. I long to see all arts. 



230 MUSIC AND THE BEFOBMATION. 

especially music, in the service of Him who created them/' 
Fortunately, the great body of Protestants accepted their 
leader's wise counsel, and retained the art of music as the 
handmaid of religion. In all his reforms Luther held his 
mission to be that of a purifier, not a destroyer. The change 
was, however, sufficiently great to revolutionize completely 
the church music system. "That the Word of God might be 
administered in the congregation with vigor and in purity, 
that they might become familiar with it, appropriate it, and 
through it be led to approach God with prayer, supplication, 
and thanksgiving, — such remained the sole aim of Luther 
in the arrangements which he made at Wittenberg, and 
desired to introduce in other places. ... As the great 
existing abuses in the public service of the church he indicates 
that the Word of God is not proclaimed, while, upon the 
other hand, unchristian fables and lies have been introduced 
into the ecclesiastical lections, hymns, and sermons, and such 
services are conducted as a work which is expected to merit 
the favor of God. He now made thorough work in the ex- 
clusion of these innovations." (Koestlin, Life of Luther.) 
The initial steps were the provisional Formulae Missae 
(1523) and the new order for the Deutsche Messe, sung at 
Wittenberg on Christmas Day, 1525. Kapellmeister Conrad 
Rupf and Cantor Johann Walther were closely associated 
with him in this work. They had been called to Wittenberg 
by command of the Elector of Saxony that Luther might 
consult them as to the shape the mass should take, and the 
music to be set to it. Walther, who remained Luther's friend 
and "musical Melanchthon," relates: "He kept me three 
long weeks at Wittenberg to write choral notes to the 
Gospels and Epistles, until the first German mass should 
be sung in the parish church. I was present at the per- 
formance, and by direction of the Doctor took a copy of 
the mass to Torgau for presentation to his Grace, the 
Elector." Walther further states that Luther himself in- 
vented cKbral tunes on the flute, and underlaid them to the 
Gospels and Epistles, singing them to the criticizing co- 
adjutors, who noted them down. 



MUSIC AND THE BEFOBMATION. 231 

Thd "German Mass" has the usual order and embraces, 
1) a people's hymn or a German psalm, 2) Kyrie Eleison 
and Gloria in Excelsis (AUein Gott in der Hoeh' sei Ehr*), 
3) collect, 4) the Epistle for the day, 5) congregational hymn, 
6) the Gospel for the day, sung by the minister, 7) the 
Nicene Creed, recited by the whole congregation, or the 
German paraphrase of the Creed, "Wir glauben all' an einen 
Gott," sung by the people, 8) the sermon, 9) the Lord's 
Prayer and exhortation preliminary to the Sacrament, 10) the 
words of institution, sung by the minister, 11) singing of 
the German Sanctus, 12) Agnus Dei, or in German, "O Lamm 
Gottes unschuldig," followed by the distribution of the Lord's 
Supper, 13) collect of thanksgiving, 14) benediction. It will 
be observed that Luther retained in the mass the word signi- 
fying the whole public service, and some of the prayers of 
the Catholic liturgy; but he removed all objectionable 
features that had been introduced during the rule of papacy, 
such as the canon, which characterized the mass as a priestly 
act, the invocation of the saints, the commemoration of the 
dead, and all the pomp and paraphernalia of a gaudy worship. 
The adoration of the saints and the virgin-mother was sub- 
stituted by the worship of Christ, the only Mediator, and 
the preaching of the Word was made the central feature of 
the service, about which all revolves. Thus the reformatiou 
of doctrines led to a reconstruction of worship on the basia 
of Scripture, "bringing the worshipers into direct com- 
munication with God in Christ through the Word of God 
and through prayer, without the qj^struction of human media- 
tors." (E. Dickinson, Music in the History of the Western^ 
Church,) It will be understood that it was far from Luther's 
intention to impose any particular form of worship on the 
Evangelical party, yet the Deutsche Masse has been virtually 
used in the Lutheran Church until this day, the various 
bodies differing only in minor particulars. ' 

We must not fail to emphasize the fact that Luther intro- 
duced into worship in place of Latin the language of the 
people, and congregational singing as a substitute for the 
chanting of the priests. Except the prominence given to the 



232 MUSIC AND THE BEF0BMATI0I7. 

preaching of the Gospel, no detail of his liturgical reform 
was as important as the labor he bestowed upon the intro- 
duction of congregational singing; none, surely, was greater, 
in its influence. With limitless zeal Luther applied himself 
to the problem of producing a new hymnody for the i)eople. 
True it is, hymns existed before the Reformation, even in 
the vernacular (see Wackernagel's collection) ; but they were 
tolerated only on special occasions, the laity not being per- 
mitted to sing them in the liturgical services. The whole 
theory of the musical system being oligarchical, singing had 
become a function of the clergy. Thus the Catholic Church 
was a spoiler of the rights of the people, who were condemned 
to be passive spectators of the ceremonial pageant, silent 
listeners to the priestly chant, which they could not under- 
stand. Moreover, excepting several fine specimens by 
Ambrose, Prudentius, and others, the pre-Ref ormation hymns 
were grossly offensive and blasphemous, given chiefly to the 
worship of the saints and the Virgin Mary, some going so 
far as to teach the preexistenee of Mary with God at the 
creation, that all things are created in her and for her. 
It was, therefore, not merely out of love of song, but also 
from necessity that the leader of the Reformation became 
the father of German hymnology. While he was engaged in 
translating the Psalms, "the spirit of the Psalmist came over 
him" and the first hymns of the Reformation were produced. 
Luther is the author of thirty-six hymns. Some of them 
were translated from the Latin, as, "Herr Gott, dich loben 
wir"; others were paraphrases of Psalms and other portions 
of Scripture, as, "Aus tiefer Not schrei' ich zu dir" and 
"Jesaiah, dem Propheten, das geschah"; again others were 
strictly original, as, "Erhalt uns, Herr, bei deinem Wort." 
Luther incited his coworkers to write and adapt hymns, and 
soon a host of hymn-writers sprang up, who were all more 
or less influenced by Luther, among them being Justus Jonas, 
Paul Ebert, Nicolaus Herman, and Margrave Albrecht of 
Brandenburg. 

No other poems of their class ever aroused so much in- 
terest among the people. Soon after the first hymn-book of 



MUSIC AND THE BEFOBMATION. 233 

Protestant Germany was published by Waltber in 1524, four 
different printing-presses were sending forth edition upon 
edition until, at the time of Luther's death, no less than 
forty-seven collections had appeared. Who can tell what 
a blessing these hymns have been to Christendom? Scat- 
tered far and wide, they became, next to the German Bible 
and the German sermon, the most powerful agency in dis- 
seminating the new evangel, and furthering the cause of 
the Reformation, "a powerful witness to« the great truths 
which were the comer-stone of the doctrines of the reformed 
Church. They constantly emphasize the principle that sal- 
vation comes not through works or any human mediation, 
but only through the merits of Christ and faith in His aton- 
ing blctod. The whole machinery of Mariolatry, hagiolatry, 
priestly absolution, and personal merit, which had so long 
stood between the individual soul and Christ, was broken 
down. Christ is no longer a st6m, hardly appeasable Judge, 
but a loving Savior, yearning over mankind, stretching out* 
hands of invitation, asking not a slavish submission to formal 
observances, but a free, spontaneous offering of the heart. 
This was the message that thrilled Germany." (Edw. Dickin- 
son, Music in the History of the Western Church,) Countless 
stories are told showing how quickly the hymns of Luther 
passed into common use, and sang the Reformation into 
the hearts of the people. Young and old sang them in public 
and in private, in church and on the market-place; they 
were, so to speak, in every one's mouth. Thus in Magdeburg, 
in 1524, an old man was sitting in the market-place, singing 
them to the people, and selling the broad sheets, when the 
burgomaster, on his way from church, saw the crowd, and had 
the "evil fellow" cast into prison for his "heretical" singing. 
But as many as two hundred burghers went straight up to 
the city hall to intercede for him. Such a deputation could 
not be resisted; no, nor yet the two little boys who, at the 
<;lose of a popish sermon in one of the churches at Luebeck, 
just as the preacher was going to commence his prayers 
for the dead, rose to strike up one of Luther's noblest Refor- 
mation hymns, in which presently the whole congregation 



234 MUSIC AND THE BEFOBMATION. 

joined, — a practise afterwards rei)eated in that good old 
town whenever an antievangelical sermon was preached, till 
at last the city council felt it needful to open the pulpit to 
the Gospel ministry. A plan, this, more effectual and far 
more pleasant than that of the celebrated Janet G^eddes for 
abolishing the mass, not by hurling footstools at the heads of 
unlucky priests, but by singing them down in Gospel praises. 
To come to even higher effects: it is credibly testified by 
one who lived close to that time that many h^undreds were 
converted to the true faith by means of that second earliest 
hymn of Luther "Dear Christians, One and All Rejoice" 
(Nun freut euch, lieben Christen g'mein). A Carmelite 
opponent of the Reformer relates how the cause of Luther 
had been marvelously advanced through these hymns* which, 
as he says, were sung, not merely in churches and schools, 
but in houses and workshops, in markets, streets, and fields. 
Nay, strangest of all, such was their popularity that they were 
even introduced in the Roman Catholic churches, and some 
of them actually appear in a popish . hymn-book printed at 
Cologne in 1610, "by order of the Prince-Bishop of Spires." 
Thus the hymns proved a force with which emperors, bishops, 
and all the powers of darkness grappled in vain. "By his 
songs he has conquered us," exclaimed Cardinal Cajetan, and 
an indignant Jesuit declared that "Luther's songs have 
damned more souls than all his books and speeches." There 
was truth in the assertion that Luther had made more con- 
verts by his hymns than by his preaching. 

Before speaking of other elements of the musical service, 
we must mention that hymn which, among all hymns of the 
Reformation, reigns supreme, and has become the watch- 
word of Protestantism. Although Luther drew his inspira- 
tion for "Ein' feste Burg" from the 46th Psalm, yet nothing 
could be more original in phraseology, nothing more char- 
acteristic of the spirit of the Reformation. It is by common 
consent the grandest of all hymn-tunes. Born of deep tribu- 
lation, in the disastrous year of 1527, it utters toned of de- 
fiance and of the all-conquering power of the Christian faith. 
It is a song "with which armies have been nerved for victory, 



/ 



MUSIC AND THE BEFORMATION. 235 

with which myriads of Christian worshipers still fan their 
devotion as they gather around the altars of their Lord, and 
which is to this day the noblest existing battle-song of tho 
children of righteousness and liberty in their conflicts with 
the powers of darkness and death. Its words and notes — 
both the creations of the great soul that led the Reforma- 
tion — thrill on the heart like bugle-blasts from heaven." 
(Seiss, Ecclesia Lutherana,) No other hymn has ever been 
as popular. Sung the length and breadth of the German 
empire, and reproduced many times in other languages, it 
served as wings to carry the truth far and wide. No other 
sacred tune has ever been admired as much by eminent 
men of every shade and opinion, by princes and potentates, 
authors and composers. Each employed it in several can- 
tatas, Mendelssohn in his Reformation Symphony, Meyerbeer 
in his opera The Huguenots, Wagner in his celebrated Kaiser- 
marschj not tp speak of Raff, Goddard, and other lesser lights 
who have made the melody the subject of study. Frederick 
the Great called it — in all seriousness — "God Almighty's 
Grenadier March." And Carlyle remarks: "There is some- 
thing in it like the sound of Alpine avalanches or the first 
murmur of earthquakes, in the very vastness of which dis- 
sonance a higher unison is revealed to us. . . . It is evident 
that to this man all popes, cardinals, emperors, devils, all 
hosts and nations were but weak, weak as the forest with all 
its strong trees might be to the smallest spark of electric 
fire." Heine's tribute is so brilliant that the reader will 
pardon us for quoting a critic who was not wont to show 
reverence for things sacred. "Not less remarkable," says 
the German poet, "not less significant than his prose works 
were Luther's poems, those stirring songs which, as it were, 
escaped from him in the very midst of his combats and his 
necessities like a flower making its way from between rough 
stones, or a moonbeam gleaming amid dark clouds. Luther 
loved music ; indeed, he wrote a treatise on the art. Accord- 
ingly, his versification is highly harmonious, so that he may 
be called the Swan of Eisleben. Not that he is by any means 
gentle or swanlike in his songs. ... In these he is fervent, 



236 MUSIO AND THE BEFORMATION. 

fierce. The hymn which he composed on his way to Worms,* 
and which he and his companions chanted as they entered 
that city, is a regular war-cry. The old cathedral trembled 
when it heard these novel sounds. The very rooks flew from 
their nests in the towers. That hymn, the Marseillaise of 
the Reformation, has preserved to this day its potent spell 
over German hearts." "To this day," we can truthfully say, 
applying these words to our own times, for Heine's prediction 
that it would again be heard in Europe in like manner as of 
old has been fulfilled. No other hymn is sung so often in 
the present war, sung by the soldiers on their way to the 
front and in the trenches, sung by the people in the churches, 
and when they have their gatherings in the public squares. 
And notwithstanding the fact that it is being misused by 
many who think of their earthly fatherland when they sing, 
"Das Reich muss uns doch bleiben," who will dare to deny that 
the hymn of hymns still has the power to sing the bold and 
joyful spirit of justifying faith into the hearts of men? 

The enormous popularity of the Lutheran hymns is in 
no small degree due to the compelling force of their lovely 
and hearty melodies. These were taken from Latin hymns 
and from sacred and secular folk-songs, the latter being 
earnest in tone, unlike most of the popular music of our day. 
Others were composed by those who arranged and adapted 
hymns. It has been the custom to deny Luther all share 
in the composition of chorals, but we have the testimony 
of Walther and of Sleidan, the nearly contemporary of the 
Reformer, and until stronger argiunents are brought forward 
than those advanced by Baeumker and Kade, whose "dis- 
coveries" crumble to dust in the light of unbiased and 
judicious criticism, we shall acknowledge Luther as the 
composer of some of the finest choral melodies, "Ein' feste 
Burg," "Vater unser im Hinmielreich," and others. 

Originally the chorals possessed great variety of rhythm. 



* Heine is here speaking of "Ein* feste Burg." He is mis- 
taken as to the date of its composition. Luther wrote it in 1527, 
three years before the Diet of Augsburg. 



MUSIC AND THE BEFOBMATIOX. 237 

triple measure and syncopations being common; but they 
are now usually sung in notes of equal length, which gives 
the song a dull, lifeless character. This change was com- 
pleted during the period of rationalism in the eighteenth 
century. The efforts of German churchmen to restore the 
original style have proved fruitless. It is but natural that 
the primitive form has been adopted by those Lutheran 
church-bodies in this country that have returned to sound 
sixteenth-century Ltitheranism. 

While congregational singing had become central, and 
necessarily received more careful attention than any other 
part of the musical service, yet artistic choir music was not 
neglected at the time of the Reformation; on the contrary, 
it commanded the admiration of Luther, who advocated the 
use of it, contending that it served to beautify the service. 
A number of writers of motet music appeared throughout 
Germany, prominent among them being Ludwig Senfl, a con- 
temporary of the Reformer, Hans Leo Hassler (1564 — 1612), 
and Johann Eccard (1553 — 1611). Among the Reformed 
Churches the Church of England adopted Luther's conserva- 
tive principle with regard to the position of the choir in 
public worship. 

The organ was not commonly used in Luther's days to 
support congregational singing. This was then the office 
of the choir. But later (1600), when its unique utility for 
accompanying was recognized, the queen of instruments 
superseded the choir, and "from that time on dates the 
development of a new school of organ-playing, based on the 
free choral variations." (E. Dickinson, The Study of the 
History of Music.) 

But if music has done much for the Reformation, the 
Reformation, in return, has done much for music. Spitta, 
Naumann, and other eminent historians agree that through 
his songs Luther gave to tonal art an impulse that was 
extraordinary. They led to an entire change in text, ex- 
pression, and melody. Treated in four-part harmonj, they 
implied a liberation of harmony, and gave birth to a new 
class of music — fugues, cantatas, oratorios, and other 



238 MUSIC AND THE BEFOBMATION. 

modem forms. Thus the music of the Reformation sug- 
gested a new art of harmony, to which the music of to-day- 
owes the greater part of its boundless wealth. If they had 
not been inspired by the grandeur and beauty of Lutheran 
church music, Bach, Mendelssohn, and Brahms could not 
have written their great choral and organ works, in which 
they glorify the doctrines of Scripture. Several attestations 
by notable English and American writers on music are de- 
serving of mention. We read in the Encyclopedia Britannica : 
^'The placing of the choral song of the church within the lips 
of the people had great religious and moral influence; it 
has had also its great effect upon art, shown in the production 
of the North German musicians ever since the first days of 
the Reformation, which abound in exercises of scholarship 
and imagination wrought upon the tunes of established ac- 
ceptance." John K. Paine, whilom Professor of Music at 
Harvard University, writes: "The foundation of the future 
greatness of German music was laid during the Reforma- 
tion. . . . We have reaped the fruits of the Reformation 
not only in our modem religious and social freedom, but 
also in some of the highest forms of musical art." t(The 
History of Music to the Death of Schubert.) Says Waldo S. 
Pratt in his History of Music: "Much of the wealth and 
depth of modem music may surely be traced in a large 
measure to the mental and spiritual stimulus accompanying 
the rise of Protestantism." 

What, then, devolves upon us, who have become heirs 
to the Reformation? It is our duty to acknowledge grate- 
fully its manifold blessings, and to show our gratitude by 
• cherishing dearly the treasures God has so graciously be- 
stowed upon us through Luther, foremost and above all the 
preaching of the pure Gospel, but also, and in no small 
measure, the musical part of our service with its congre- 
gational hymn. Our liturgy is neither bare nor pompous, 
but simple, solemn, and Scriptural, gaining favorable recog- 
nition, among Reformed Churches, which feel a need for 
liturgic service. And as to our chorals, they are conmaonly 
conceded to be unexcelled models of their type, and "are 



MUSIC AND THE* EEFOBMATION. 239 

finding their way into the better English and American 
hymn-books of all denominations." (Lutkin, Music in the 
Church.) Even in the Church of England, the liturgy of 
which is modeled after that of our Church (see Dr. Jacobs, 
Lutheran Movement in England), and which has better music 
than the other Reformed bodies, the superiority of the Lu- 
theran hymns is recognized. In Christian Life in Song an 
Anglican writer candidly avers: "We have not one compo- 
sition corresponding with the earliest burst of German song. 
This primary formation with its massive strength and its 
mountain ranges, upheaved by the great inward fire of the 
Reformation, is with the Churches of England altogether 
wanting. And the deficiency is significant." Shall we, then, 
reject the heritage that others are learning to prize highly? 
Ear from it. In matters of faith we make no concessions 
to the fads and fancies of the hour. This must be our 
position also with regard to the music of our Church. It is 
obvious that the melodies of the professional revivalist, 
which have crept into the hymn-books of many non-Lutheran 
denominations, are not deserving of use in worship. The 
constant use of the three major harmonies in their simplest 
positions precludes a proper interpretation of the text by 
harmonic devices, and makes the tunes sound cheap and 
monotonous. Let us never use such unworthy substitutes, 
which have no devotional value. "Ecclesiastical ragtime" 
may be a fitting ornament for the meeting of Billy Sunday, 
but it is surely not suitable in a service which is characterized 
by solemnity and dignity, and in which everything is done 
unto edifying. The same is true regarding choir and organ 
music. It cannot be denied that the selections made are not 
always in good taste, modern popular strains often receiving 
generous support, whereas the classics of the sixteenth and 
seventeenth centuries are neglected. 

We conclude by quoting the composer of the Messiah, 
who, when he spoke of the beautiful choruses he had written, 
exclaimed: "But what is all this compared to the grandest 
of all makers of harmony — above, above !" 

God grant that we may ever employ to His honor the 



240 LUTHEB AND THE CLASSICS. 

precious gift of music, until we shall, through the infinite 
merits of our Savior, enter life everlasting, there to appear 
before "the grandest of all masters of harmony," and join 
the angelic choir in rapturous song, there to sing the hymns 
of joy unspeakable, and to hear the voice come out of the 
throne, saying: "Praise our God, all ye His servants, and 
ye that fear Him, both small and great. . . . Blessing, and 
glory, and wisdom, and thanksgiving, and honor, and power, 
and might, be unto our God forever and ever. Amen." 



Luther and the Classics. 

Prof. E. G. Sihleb, Ph. D., New York University, University 

Heights, N. Y. 

In preparing this study, I have drawn somewhat heavily on 
Luther's Table Talk, using the critical edition of Weimar, of 
recent times, Hermann Boehlau's Nachfolger. In this publication 
three volumes are devoted to that noted material, the records 
by Veit Dietrich, Lauterbach, Cordatus, Schlaginhauf (Turbicida), 
and others being separately produced. How far the mixture of 
Latin and German represents Luther's actual and original utter- 
ance, I am unable to decide. As a rule, of course, my citations 
are presented in English. 

In our endeavor to gain a true perspective of Luther and 
the classics, we must at once set aside the current conceptions 
and habits of our own day. Our first object must be to 
comprehend somewhat the great cultural movement known as 
Humanism, which in that very generation had begun to 
cross the Alps, and which had been for some time before 
largely in the keeping and nurture of Italian scholars, and 
had centered in Florence. Petrarch, Boccaccio, Valla, 
Poggio, Filelfo, Bruni, Politian, Enea Silvio Piccolomini 
(Pope Pius II), Guarino, Marsilio Ficino, Pico de Mirandola, 
and others had been protagonists in this renaissance of the 
classics.!) Through Reuchlin, Agricola, Muth (Mutianus), 



1 ) See the works of Voigt, Burckhardt, Gregorovius, Symonds, 
Geiger, and others. The eminent historian Villari maintains a 
wise and critical reserve in dealing with these times. (Cf. E. G. 
Sihler, Testimonium Animae, 1908, chap. 2.) 



LUTHEE AND THE CLASSICS. 241 

and others Greek (taught in Italy by Gaza and Argyropulos; 
Byzantine exiles we may call them) was brought to Northern 
Europe during Luther^s boyhood and early youth. Its study 
spread but slowly. About the year 1500, however, Desiderius 
Erasmus, of Rotterdam, then thirty-three or thirty-five years 
old, had attained a certain preeminence, which soon was 
acknowledged throughout Europe and even in Italy itself. 
Let us endeavor to see what the essence of that distinction 
really was. Primarily it was his rare command of Latin, 
both with voice and pen. Latin had been the language of 
schools and universities, outside of the Byzantine empire, 
virtually throughout medieval times. The central point, then, 
in the Renaissance was not to introduce Latin, but to replace 
the Latin of Scholasticism by that of Cicero, Seneca, Horace, 
and Vergil. We are so habituated in our own day to associate 
finished speech and a national literature with all the chief 
states of the world that we can hardly conceive the con- 
dition and status of European culture as it was in 1500. 
The only literary language everywhere current and recognized 
was Latin. "Good Letters (honae literae) were Latin Letters. 
The belief seriously held by the leaders was that they would 
simply go on where Cicero, Vergil, Terence, Seneca had 
left off. This was the basic view in Paris, Oxford, London, 
Cambridge, no less than at the newer foundations, like those 
of Leipzig, Erfurt, and, soon, of Wittenberg. In Cologne 
alone, and at Louvain (Louven), where Dominicans and 
Franciscans outdid even the Sorbonne of Paris as champions 
of inherited Scholasticism, did this Humanism not make 
much headway. Erasmus, after sojourning much and moving 
about between Paris, Oxford, Cambridge, Italy, England 
again, Louvain, finally settled at Basle, where Froben pub- 
lished his original works, as well as his stupendous series 
of patristic and classic editions. After the hard and fast 
definitions of Peter the Lombard, of Thomas Aquinas, Duns 
Scotus, and their successors, it was felt a glorious emancipa- 
tion to appropriate the thought, the sentiment, and wisdom 
of the ancients, and to vie with them in their own fields 
both of ideas and expression. The Adagia of Erasmus (first 
Four Hundred Years. 16 



242 LUTHEB AND THE CLASSICS. 

published at Paris, 1500) perhaps most completely permit us 
to-day to appreciate the Humanism of that time. Formally 
they were to furnish material from the classics to illustrate 
and embellish discourse in that purer and restored X«atinity. 
All, or almost all, strove for this end. 

A mere glance at the Adagia2) shows that Erasmus had 
made his excerpts from a very wide range of authors indeed. 
We are impressed by the range of Greek writers, many of whom 
Erasmus had to read in Ms. codices because they had not yet 
been printed. Greek citations are always followed by a Latin 
version. On the Greek side Erasmus used Homer, Hesiod, Theog- 
nis, Plato, Aristotle, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Aristoph- 
anes, Lucian, Hesychius, Pollux, Plutarch, Diogenes Laertius, and 
many others. He seems to have delved occasionally even into the 
Scholia of Homer. — The crude and mechanical juxtaposition of 
some utterance of Christ or of some passage of St. Paul close to 
some classicist verity is characteristic. The whole was intended 
as an "adiumentum politioris literaturae candidatis." 

Luther's school-work at Magdeburg and Eisenach was 
largely concerned with the grammar of Donatus, and probably 
with some Latin fables composed after Aesop. He never 
mentions Phaedrus, but always Aesop.3) 

There is a reminiscence,^) uttered by him in 1537: On 
Fridays the so-called "slips of the wolves" were produced, 
on which certain monitors, called wolves (lupi), had noted 
which of the pupils had talked German in class during the 
week. Such scholars received the rod. On Thursday Donatus 
was reviewed, i. e,, they had to cite the exact place in Donatus 
where the form given by the schoolmaster was defined. — 
Luther keenly disliked Ferdinand of Austria. "Oh, he gets 
no 'felix' ^) in Donatus." 6) 



2) New York University Library possesses an edition by Fro- 
ben (Basle, 1546) in folio, which I have used. 

3) L. Roth, Die mittelalterlichen Sammlungen lateiniacher 
Tierfaheln. Philologus I, 523 sqq. 

4) Table Talk, Weimar ed., No. 3566 A. I discovered myself 
in this study that some curious details as to the eagle were really 
derived by Luther from Pliny, N. Hist. 10, 17, directly. Cf. Wei- 
mar ed., No. 2167. 

6) a "good mark." 6) No. 3763, ^n. 



LUTHEE AND THE CLASSICS. 243 

Of the Aesopian fables Luther entertained a very high 
opinion. What attracted him there was the didactic clear- 
ness in their moralizing purpose, palpable even to a very 
simple intelligence. In his mature period he took delight 
in quoting some, as once (in 1536) '^) of the wolf and the 
lamb, the wolf and the crane, Eight and Might, i, e,, the 
lion's share in the joint hunting, the bear and the trav- 
elers, etc. 

At the University of Erfurt Luther studied from 1501 
onward, entering in his eighteenth year. Li 1502, he received 
the elementary degree, his baccalaureate; in 1505, in his 
twenty-second year, he was made Magister Artium, these 
"arts" being the three of the Trivium (Grammar, Khetoric, 
Dialectic) and the four of the Quadrivium (Arithmetic, 
Geometry, Astronomy, Music). After these general, we may 
say cultured pursuits, there followed some definite profes- 
sional study. Law, Theology, or Medicine. Luther had 
already bought a Corpv^ Juris to begin his courses in Juris- 
prudence, when by that sudden resolution, so portentous for 
him and all the world, he entered the Augustinian monastery, 
July 17, 1505, before he had completed his twenty-second 
year. Later (1532) he spoke with respect 8) of the ancient 
Roman jurists, while he regarded the lawyers and the law- 
practise of his own day with deep distrust as a purely mer- 
cenary pursuit: 

The most severe of his studies from 1502 to 1505 dealt 
with Aristotle and, as inextricably bound up with these 
pursuits, some measure of scholastic lore. Looking at the 
whole matter in a historical way, we cannot fairly separate 
Aristotle from the classics, we cannot separate him from 
Scholasticism, which Luther himself eventually destroyed by 
the Scriptural principle. There is a very positive inter- 
dependence here. Alhertus Magnus at Cologne, and still more 
his famous disciple, Thomas of Aquino (1225 — 1274), both 



7) No. 3490. 

8) No. 1618. Elsewhere, No. 2470 A: "Ergo gentiles per legem 
suam Caesarem defendunt contra papam Christianorum, Scaevola, 
Ulpianus etc., qui ante Codicem fuerunt." 



244 LUTlIEa AND THE CLASSICS. 

of the Dominican order, incorporated certain elements of 
Aristotelian metaphysics and all his dialectic works, 9) a con- 
siderable portion of his De Anima and other doctrines, in 
their own presentation of Christian verity or philosophical 
theology (it matters little which of these appellations we 
choose). 

In his own harveat-time Luther could become positively 
aroused when he recalled how much in his academic youth 
men knew of Aristotle and how little of the Bible. Aristotle, 
through the dogmatic system of Thomas and the Thomists, 
had become, in a way, a usurper; a relation or function of 
which, of course, the historical Aristotle was entirely in- 
nocent. 

But let us go forward to some of the references I have 
gathered. "Dialectic ^^) is a contrivance applied to other 
branches of learning. I learned it thoroughly (perdidici) 
in my early manhood." "I had to learn the lore of the 
Sophists 11) just as Daniel learned Chaldean, and Joseph, 
Egyptian." 

We come upon the Ten Categories (decern praedicamenta) 
of Aristotle in a note of Luther on Matt. 3, 15 sqq. : Sub- 
stance, Quantity, Quality, Relation, Active, Passive, When, 
Where, Situation (Veit Dietrich forgot Condition, exetv). 

Elsewhere (1531)12): "Aristotle's Physical Theory, Meta- 
physics, and De Anima, which are the best books, these, 
I know, I understand perfectly. His Metaphysics deal with 
Being, his doctrine of Nature with Becoming: in these two 
is contained all the achievement of Aristotle. Now Aristotle 
holds that God contemplates nothing beyond Himself. But 
this, removing Him from all concern for human misery, 



9) The Categories, the Analytica Priora and Posteriora, De In- 
terpretatione, the Topica, collectively designated as the Organon. 

10) No. 143 (in 1531/32); Veit Dietrich's record. 

11) Cf. F. W. Kampschulte, Die Universitaet Erfurt. Trier, 
1858. Fr. Paulsen, Geschichte des gelehrten Unterrichts auf den 
deutschen Schulen und Universitaet en vom J^usga^g des Mittel- 
alters his zur Oegenwart. Leipzig, 1885, pp. 48 sqq. 

12) Veit Dietrich's notes, No. 135. 



LUTHEB AND THE CLASSICS. 245 

sin, and sorrow, would, in effect, be a denial of His providence, 
nay, of His essence or being." 

Another Aristotelian concept which we often meet with in 
Luther is the difference between the potential (to Swd/jiet ov) 
and the actual (ivegyeta). "When we were discussing 13) 
whether God was really in each tiniest creature, grass, tree, 
etc., he answered: *Yes, because God is excluded from no 
place, and hemmed in in none. He is everywhere and no- 
where. But the question arises whether He is everywhere 
potentially only or substantially/ etc." Elsewhere (1532) i^) : 
'^Between the ethics of Aristotle and of Ecclesiastes there is 
this difference, that Aristotle measures morality by reason's 
prescribing the best course, but Ecclesiastes by the heeding 
of the commandments of God." Again (1532)15): "When 
I was a young theologian and had to make nine corollaries 
out of a single question, I received [as my task] these two 
words: *God created.' Then Thomas [Aquinas] gave me 
probably one hundred questions on top of all this. Further- 
more, this is the way Thomas proceeds: First he receives 
propositions from Paul, Peter, John, Isaiah, etc.; then he 
concludes: *But Aristotle says so and so,' and it is in ac- 
cordance with Aristotle that he interprets the Scriptures." 

Should infants be baptized that present some physical 
monstrosity? Luther thought not.^^) "I consider the soul 
of such a one merely as vegetative life." "Our Kighteous- 
ness 1'^) is in the category of Relation." The four principles 
of Aristotle also were taken over by Luther, 18) viz,, the 
causa materialis, formalis, efficiens, and finalis. Thus (in 
"Np. 2402 A), in urging that there is no merit in sinful man 
(1532) : "God is the cau^a efficiens of merit." At one time, 
jesting about the failure of Mrs. Luther's home-brewing 



13) No. 240. 14) No. 168. 15) No. 280. 

16) No. 323. Anima vegetativa or nutritiva is Aristotle's 
<pvTix6v or '&QSJtxix6v. 

17) No. 1710. 

18) Aristotle, P%sica 2, 7 : ai aixiai TeTTageg, ^ vXtj, to sJdog, 
z6 xivrjaav, to ov svexa. (Cf. Luther's Works, Table Talk, Wei- 
mar ed., No. 3124, on Faith.) 



246 LUTHEE XyO THE CLASSICS. 

(1532, Xo. 2757 A) : "I beg to Goodness for the beer's causa 
materialis, forrnalis, efficiens, and finalis, or, if it is still to 
go through its brewing, that at least the tenth effort might 
be a success." Another Aristotelian distinction which had 
become current was that of the contemplative ^) (or aca- 
demic) and the active or practical life, (No. 3117.) 

Another time Luther discussed political types and typical 
mutations, as, the change from democracy to ochlocracy, the 
characteristic features of oligarchy, and of genuine aris- 
tocracy .2^) He rejected Aristotle's definition of the soul. — 
When he came to read Cicero's writings more freely (it seems 
this was in his evangelical period), he preferred them to 
Aristotle. I need not say that the Renaissance took both 
authors more seriously than we now do, endowing them, as 
a rule, with a doctrinal authority, which we now, after 
centuries of historical and critical study, quite proi)erly 
withhold from them. But at that time "philosophy" meant 
classical philosophy. For Cicero, Luther then (in 1538) 
entertained an almost affectionate ^i) regard. 

In a reminiscence of his Erfurt period, a reminiscence 
recorded in August, 1532, he said : 22) "While I was a papist, 
I was ashamed to name Christ ; I thought : Jesus is a wom- 
anish name. But Aristotle and Bonaventura, these were 
great in my estimation." 

It is clear that the forms of Aristotelian dialectic re- 
mained deeply ingrained in his mental habits. In No. 499 



19) Vita "speculativa." This is Aristotle's ^emgrfxixog fiiog, 
Ethica Nicom, I, 3. 

20) Cordatus, who recorded it, wrote: "In 5 Ethicorum.'* It 
should be Ethica Nioom. 8, 12. 

21) No. 3904: "Es ist ein teurer Mann gewest, qui multa l^it 
et iudicavit et deinde etiam dicere potuit; hat sein Ding mit 
Ernst geschrieben, non ita lusit et graecissavit ut Aristoteles et 
Plato." 

22) No. 1746. Bonaventura, John of Fidenza (1221 — 1274), 
one of the scholastic leaders of the Middle Ages, was the protag- 

• 

onist among the Franciscans, and is known in the Roman Cath- 
olic tradition as "Doctor Seraphicus." 



LUTHEB AND THE CLASSICS. 247 

(spring of 1633) he presents three syllogisms coi;iceming 
Faith, to which he appends rejoinders of his own. 

He placed Melanchthon very high, indeed, in this faculty 
of logical procedure and orderliness.23) 

"In my day," he said (No. 2191, in 1531), "there was no 
training in dialectic in the schools at all. The only thing 
they taught, and this in mean language, were Universcds 
and Categories, iand though they had awful contentions about 
these, still they understood not how to make any practical 
application of the same." 

But we must move forward. — Rhetoric in that age was 
altogether based on Quintilian. Whenever, in preaching or 
other discourses, Luther referred to the main point or chief 
question or topic, he used the term status.^) Amplification, 
and the non-dogmatical bringing home of a truth he often 
designates as "Rhetoric." On the Festival of the Annuncia- 
tion of Mary one should preach nothing but Rhetoric, i, e,, 
pure Joy, no theoretical disputation. (No. 494.) '^Dialectic 
teaches. Rhetoric appeals to the emotions." (No. 2199 A.) 
Other terms of ancient rhetoric used by him are catachresis, 
using a term improperly (Nos. 2095, 2204) ; tapinosis, humble 
treatment, (No. 1671) ; mycterismus, sarcasm, ridicule (cf. 
Quintil. 8, 6, 59 ; in No. 2662) ; pathos, emotion (No. 2696 : 
that the prophets outdo all the emotional effects of Demos- 
thenes and Cicero ; February, 1533) ; thesis and hypothesis 
(No. 3032 A). As a monk, he said, 25) he had an itch for 
allegory: "omnia allegorisabam" (No. 335). "Satan has 
more eloquent rhetoric than even Cicero" (No. 3092). The 
eloquence of women as compared with that of Cicero 
(No. 1054). 

As to the following citations in general, one cannot 
I>ositively state how far they meant general reading. On the 



23) Phllippus fecit, quod nullus fecit in mille annis in dia- 
lectica. Dialectica hab' ich gewusst, aber Philippus hat mich's 
lemen applizieren ad rem. 

24) E, g., No. 1685, on status {ozdais), Cf. Quintilian, InsU 
Orat. Ill, 6. Cf. Nos. 744. 2459 b. 

25) Perhaps then under the influence of Bonaventura. 



248 LUTHEB AND THE CLASSICS. 

one handy Erasmus's Adagia were furnished with admirable 
indices, so that one could readily find some illustrative 
apopthegrm, epigram, or sentence. On the other hand, we 
know that Luther had a certain familiarity with certain 
authors, such as Vergil. And furthermore we must not for- 
get that there were no national or vernacular classics. 
A humanist in the sense of that time Luther never was. 
Without knowing it, he became, in a way, the first of German 
classics, alongside of whose Qerman Bible and world-stirring 
and endiuring German tracts and treatises the most graceful 
Latinity of Erasmus and of Melanchthon himself impresses 
us as exotic, or as wax-flowers preserved under a frame of 
glass. 

Nothing in Latin was difficult to a Latinist such as 
Luther was. As late as 1537, he bought a copy of Lucan, of 
whom he said very aptly : "I cannot make out whether he is 
a poet or a historian" (No. 3637). As we are on this general 
theme, and before we take up the secular authors in some 
detail of sequence, we must not leave unrecorded here the 
fact that it was Jerome's Latin Bible through which Luther 
became the restorer of the Gospel of Christ and the emanci- 
pator of many nations. Always, we have reason to believe, 
the Latin Bible was quoted by him from memory, sometimes 
with slight variation of Jerome's exact version. I found this 
so on referring to the text of Jerome many scores of times, 
as exhibited in an approved edition : Rome, 1861. This fact 
alone, and the current habit and necessity of Latin quotation, 
BO determined, together with the mass of academic and tech- 
nical language in Latin terms, — all this makes it more than 
likely that his ordinary conversation was not merely bilingual, 
but that in all matters of a theoretical or controversial 
nature Latin predominated over the German. 

As to classical culture in general, Luther held that it 
was good, too, for a theologian; that a man so trained was 
more efficient than a man without this training. "One knife 
cuts better than another; therefore, also, a man who knows 
ffifl Luuruages, and has some attainments in the liberal arts, 
and teach better and more distinctly." (1533; 



LUTHER AND THE CLASSICS. 249 

No. 439.) He was, as I said, no humanist. — Melanchthon,26) 
in certain aspects of his faculties and ideals, was a veritable 
junior Erasmus, i, e,, as a classical scholar, a brilliant hu- 
manist indeed; while for Luther the tremendous spiritual 
import of the Bible dwarfed the secular letters, whether these 
were considered as to formal grace or as to their themes.27) 
As for reading, he held (January, 1533) that "a student who 
would not waste his efforts ought to choose some good author, 
and such a one he should read and reread, to have him 
changed into his own flesh and blood" (No. 2894 A). "Bap- 
tista Mantuanus [an Italian imitator of Latin verse] was 
the first poet I read; later on I read the Heroides of Ovid; 
afterward I stumbled on Vergil" (incidi in Virgilium, 
No. 256). "Besides these [i.^e,, at Erfurt] I read nothing 
in the poets." He said he was taken up witl\ scholastic 
theology [i. e,, Aristotle]. With Vergil, indeed, he seems to 
have acquired an easy familiarity, so that a turn of speech 
derived from that Roman national poet would come to hand 
quite readily. He discusses the etymology of many proper 
nouns, among them that of Dido (No. 262). He utters an 
invective against Erasmus by adapting lines from Vergil's 
Bucolics (No. 446) : 

Qui Satanam non odit, amet tua carmina, Erasme, 

Atque idem iungat Furias et mulgeat Orcum. 

(Who does not hate the devil, let him love your verse, Erasmus, 

And likewise yoke the Furies, and milk the Sire of Darkness.) 

The ancient empires all had their time and their end, 
even proud Rome, in spite of the famous prophecy in Vergil : 

Imperium sine fine dedi. 

Descanting on idealization, Judith being under discussion, 
Luther said (No. 697) : "Just as Vergil, therefore, drew his 
Aeneas with enlargements (amplificationihus) , greater than 
his actual stature, so also the author of the book of Judith 
drew her as a woman endowed with loyalty and all the 
virtues." 



26) Cf. many of his elegant Latin orations and introductory 
lectures in Corpus Reformatorunij Vol. XI. 

27 ) Cf . No. 1666. 



250 LUTHEB AND THE CLASSICS. 

The grand simplicity of St. John was displeasing to 
Erasmus ; he will think : "His style is not like that of Homer 
or Vergil or my own" (No. 699). 

There were at Wittenberg two noted jurists and men of 
affairs: one of these, Dr. Schurff, Luther compared with 
Ovid, the other. Dr. Brueck (Pontamus), with Vergil 
(No. 1421), implying, perhaps, that the first named had more 
grace and the other more dignity. 

He praises the lot of the agriculturist, citing "Vergilius 

in Bucolicis" (from memory, it is really from the Gteorgica 

2, 486) : 

fortunatos nimlum, si tua bona norint, 
Agricolas ! 

(Oh, all too happy, if only they knew their blessings, the 
farmers!) 

Several times (unless the recording guests made a slip) 
he cites as from Horace what really was a reminiscence from 
Vergil, as in No. 3137: 

Nescia mens hominum sortis ignara futuri. 

The words are actually from Vergil (Aen. 10, 601) : 
Nescia mens hominum fati sortisque futurae. 

("Mens, mind, not knowing fate and future lot.") Aptly 
he cites (No. 3149 A) : 

Tendimus in Latium. (Our goal is Latium.) 

Speaking of sermons : To preach long is no art, but to preach 
correctly and efficiently, "hoc opus, hie labor est" ("this is 
an achievement, this is toil"; Vergil, Aen, 6, 129). Warmly 
he appreciates the dramatic power exhibited by Vergil in 
Aen. IV (the Dido-book). He compares Ovid with Vergil: 
the former is great in "sententiae" (epigrammatic, pithy 
truths). Kef erring to a certain Catianus, who for a huge 
sum of money had undertaken to play the traitor in the 
interest of the Turks, in 1538 (No. 3763) -— "and he said, 
with a sigh: 

Auri sacra fames, quid non mortalia pectofa cogis?" 

From memory again; really: 

. . . quid non mortalia pectora cogis, 
Auri sacra fames? 



LUTHEB AND THE CLASSICS. 251 

("What driveth not the hearts of men to do, accursed greed 
of gold?" Vergil, Aen. 3, 57.) A term in Vergil (Aen. 7, 741) 
for German javelins (No. 3752). 

He seems to have read in Cicero's De Oratore, for he 
quotes from memory Cicero's dictum: "There is no better 
way to impress others than when you have first made an 
impression on yourself" (No. 1319). 28) 

For the reductio per impossibile (No. 3499) he quotes an 
incident from Cicero's defense of Milo. Then he goes on 
to cite the case of the two sons found sleeping in the 
chamber of their own father done to death in that very 
night. The youths were charged with patricide, but ac- 
quitted. It was an incident used by Cicero Pro Boscio 
Amerino (64). Ovid he particularly liked for the sententiae 
found in his works. "While we dislike what is with us, we 
love what is away. Of this also says Ovid : 29) 

Quod licet, ingratum est; quod non licet, acrius urit. 

(Amores II, 19, 3: "What is permitted we like not; what 
is not permitted troubles us more passionately.") And 
a similar sentiment 30) from Ovid, De Art. Am, (1, 349) : 
"Fertilior seges est alienis semi)er in agris" ("More bounteous 
ever is the crop on other people's fields"), or again ^l) from 
Ovid (Am, 3, 4, 17) : 

Nitimur in vetitum, semper cupimusque negata. 

("We strive against forbidden things, and set our heart on 
that which is denied.") Elsewhere he says (No. 3616) : 
"Ovid ist ein feiner Poet gewesen, qui excedit omnes alios 
sententiis ; er kann die schoensten sententias in einem Vers- 
chen bringen: *Nox et amor vinumque nihil moderabile 
suadent.' (Am, X, 6, 59.) 

Die Nacht, die Liebe, dazu der Wein 
Zu nichts Gutes Ratgeber seyn. 

28) Probably what he recalled of Cicero, De Oratore (2, 189): 
"Nisi omnes ii motus, quos orator adhibere volet iudici, in ipso 
oratore impressi esse atque inusti videbuntur." 

29) Nos. 814 and 1542. 30) No. 3463, d. 

31 ) No. 3468 ; a favorite citation of the present writer's father. 



252 LUTHER AND THE CLASSICS. 

With Terence Luther was particularly well acquainted. 
Terence, he said (Menander really), knew the life of men, 
and how people fared, while the monks lived in an artificial 
seclusion, like pug-dogs resting on upholstered couches 
(No. 285). 

On one occasion (March 2, 1533) he spoke with warm 
appreciation of the Andria of Terence and the various char- 
acters and their delineation: Pamphilus, the young lover, 
the slaves, the father (Simo), etc. Still his concern does not 
touch anything higher than this elementary social and human 
range (No. 467). "Comedies" (he meant primarily Terence) 
"ought to be produced by boys, first, that they may have 
training in the Latin tongue; furthermore, mankind is 
educated by characters of fiction, and each one is reminded 
of his own duty, in addition to this the wiles of evil women 
are laid bare. . . . And if the comedies were not to be 
produced by a Christian on account of certain unclean ele- 
ments, then not even the Bible ought to be read. But he 
who takes offense at such things takes offense when no one 
offers it." (No. 3346.) 

Greek Luther does not seem to have touched at Erfurt. 
His Aristotelian studies were all accomplished through Latin 
translations. It was primarily his study of the Greek Testa- 
ment which made him take up Greek with serious purpose. 
Melanchthon, as we know, was one of the most finished 
Grecians of Europe. In questions of technical scholarship 
in this field Luther always assumed a demeanor of extreme 
modesty, e. g, (No. 1040, 1530—1535): "I know neither 
Greek nor Hebrew, but still I will hold my own with 
a Hebraist or Hellenist. The languages in themselves do 
not constitute a theologian." "The New Testament, though 
it is written in Greek, still is full of Hebraisms and Hebrew 
turns of speech." His references to Greek, then, are, in the 
main, to the Greek Testament. In time he adopted single 
Greek terms, introducing them perhaps in academic work, 
and so even in his Table Talk, such as imsixeia, comity, 
gentleness (Nos. 320, 1474, 1900), bearing with peculiar 
manners of some people {tgojiofpogog, No. 815), svdoxiav, Luke 



LUTHEB AND THE CLASSICS. 253 

2, 14 (No. 3654 b). "There are found a goodly number of 
married folk who have no affection for each other" (dotogyoi, 
coniuges, 2350 B). "Those words of Peter are not only 
didaxTixd, also prophetica/' (1 Pet. 5, 3; No. 3863.) 

Often Luther compared Erasmus with Lucian. — I have 
found one of Menander^s monostichs (single lines), which 
Lauterbach (No. 3611) cites as copied by Luther himself. 
It is No. 168 in the collection of Meineke (1841). 

Elg iari SovXog olxiag, 6 Seojtorijg. "One slave the house- 
hold has, its master is the man." Which Luther's muse 
elaborated in the subjoined true-grained fashion. 

Der Herr muss selber sein der Knecht, 

Wil er's iin Hause finden recht. 

Die fraw muss selber sein die maght, 

Wil sie schaffen im hause racht. 

Dass gesinde nimmer mehr bedenckt, 

Wass nutz und schaden im hause brengt; 

Es ist ihnen nichts gelegen dran, 

Weil sie es nicht fur eigen han. 

Sie seynd die gest und fremde im hauss. 

Wess eygen ist, der gehe nicht heraus. 

Of course, Luther was not Melanchthon. We cannot well 
take leave of Wittenberg as it ^hen was without directing 
a parting glance in this connection at that eminent classicist, 
whose Greek attainments, no doubt, were to supplement the 
equipment of the spiritual leader of Wittenberg. Vol. XI 
of the CorpTis Beformatorum contains many of the Latin 
orations delivered by him as professor of the Humanities in 
Wittenberg. Thus his inaugural in that university, Au- 
gust 29, 1518, when he was but twenty-one years old, a lecture 
cast in Latin of exquisite purity and idiomatic elegance. 
Its theme was : "De Corrigendis Adolescentium Studiis." He 
recommends with enthusiastic fervor "bonas literas et rena- 
scentes musas." In part his address is a polemic against the 
scholastics. Their domination, we clearly see, was jeopardized 
by Humanism. He deplores the awful Latin in which Aris- 
totle had been studied. He refers to Thomas (of Aquino), 
to Duns Scotus, to Seraphicus (Bonaventura). For the last 



254 WHEN ENGLAND ALAcbsT BECAME LUTHERAN. 

three hundred years Scholasticism had absorbed and monopo- 
lized all academic work. It had granted no proper place to 
Greek, to mathematics. Aristotle should indeed be studied, 
but in his original Greek garb, historically and philologically 
purged of scholastic matter. Similarly Quintilian was to be 
studied and the cyclopaedic work of the elder Pliny, Plato's 
Laws, Aristotle's Ethics, Homer, Vergil, Horace, Ancient 
History. Christ Himself was to be studied from the sources. 
The Bible, in fact, without "frigidae glossulae" was to be 
studied in the original tongues. Human traditions were to 
give place to evangelical truth. If only the students were to 
devote the remnants of their time (subsicivas aliquot koras) 
to Greek. He, Melanchthon, would exert himself with per- 
sonal zeal and toil that their labors should prove successful. 
The two first courses Melanchthon announced were these: 
one on Homer, one on St. Paul's Epistle to Titus. 

The great thing, we may conclude, was to supplant 
Scholasticism with what we now call source-work, whether 
in the Bible itself or in secular learning and letters. 



When England Almost Became Lutheran. 

Pbop. Th. Gbaebneb, Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, Mo. 

A Lutheran editor fifty years ago interpreted as follows 
the sentiment which then prevailed in our country over 
against Lutheranism: "Lutheranism is a strange and exotic 
plant in the English tongue. It may prosper well enough 
in the German or Scandinavian languages, but as for English, 
there is no possible hope for your success in trying to effect 
a settlement for your system here. Your Lutheranism is 
altogether too much of a novelty among us, without a history 
and home in the English tongue.'' 

While this impression of Lutheranism has not quite dis- 
appeared from contemporary Reformed literature, the time 
is now past that we must feel under any obligations to argue 
the propriety of establishing our Church in a country pre- 



WHEI7 ENGLAND ALMOST BECAME LUTHERAN. 255 

dominantly English in speech. Statistics show that our 
Church not only has held its own in the United States, but 
has grown at a more rapid pace than any other denomination, 
not excluding the Eoman Catholic. It is, moreover, firmly 
established in the English tongue. Yet there are those even 
among us who are unaware of the curious fact that, far 
from being an element foreign to English history, Lu- 
theranism at the time of the Kef ormation was a great power 
in the English language, and that it existed in England 
during almost a hundred years as an acknowledged force. 
Indeed, it was from Luther and colaborers that the clear 
Gospel-light first shone into the medieval darkness which 
enveloped Great Britain in that momentous third decade of 
the sixteenth century. 

The indebtedness of England to Luther and his fellow- 
Beformers, as distinguished from the Swiss Reformers, Cal- 
vin and Zwingli, is not a matter which has only been recog- 
nized in recent years. In the seventeenth century Nicolas 
Lithenius, Swedish pastor of a Lutheran congregation in 
London, wrote a book in which he demonstrates "that the 
English Beformation was not inaugurated by disciples of 
Zwingli and Calvin, but by those of Luther, so that Luther, 
the great instrument of God in reforming the British Church, 
opened the way to England and Scotland to extricate them- 
selves from papal servitude." 

These words are in consonance with the historical records. 
It cannot be doubted that for a long time the adherents 
of evangelical truth in England were no other than Lu- 
therans, who were not only indebted for the possession of 
the Gospel-light to Luther and his friends, but who, more- 
over, deliberately rejected the doctrines of Zwingli, and held 
fast to that of the Lutheran Church. The Lutheran doctrine, 
far from being the last which made its appearance in the 
English tongue, was the first to replace the superstitions of 
popery, and its confessors in England were among the very 
first and noblest martyrs that glorified God in the age of the 
Reformation. 

Since the fourteenth century, when Wyclif, a teacher in 



256 WHEN ENGLAND ALMOST BECAME LUTHERAN. 

Oxford University, had testified against a number of Roman 
abuses, and gave the people a translation of the Bible, there 
had always been adherents of a purer faith diffused through 
the British Isles. They did not form a compact organization, 
nor did they always make a profession of their belief in 
opposition to the ruling darkness. Yet their influence ap- 
peared sufficiently menacing to the Eoman Church that 
Richard II and Henry IV, under priestly influence, insti- 
tuted bloody persecutions against the Lollards, as the ad- 
herents of Wyclif were commonly called. As soon as the 
mighty writings of Luther began to thunder against the 
Romish corruptions, not only the rumor of the events en- 
acted on the Continent reached England, and cheered many 
a groaning heart, but these writings themselves were brought 
over, in many cases translated into English, and always 
read with the greatest eagerness. Bishop Burnet says in 
his famous History of the Reformation: "As these things 
[the Reformation] did spread much in Germany, Switzer- 
land, and the Netherlands, so their books came over into 
England, where there was much matter already prepared 
to be wrought on ... by the opinions of the Lollards, between 
which and the doctrines of the Reformers there was great 
affinity. Many of them were translated into the English 
tongue, and were much read and applauded. This quickened 
the proceedings against the Lollards, and the inquiry against 
them became so severe that great numbers were brought into 
the toils of the bishops. If a man had spoken but a light 
word against the Roman Church, he was seized by the 
bishop's officers; and if they taught the children the Lord's 
Prayer, the Ten Commandments, and the Apostles' Creed in 
the common tongue, that was crime enough to bring them to 
the stake" (to be burned alive), "as it did six men and 
a woman at Coventry April 4, 1519. Longland, bishop of 
Lincoln, caused several others to be burned." 

In spite of these desperate measures the writings of 
Luther, and such parts of the Bible as had been newly 
rendered into English, were read with avidity. There was 
a universal rush to the fountain of living waters, the moment 



WHEN ENGLAND ALMOST BECAME LUTHERAN. 257 

it was unsealed. Every one that could, purchased the Book, 
and if he was unable to read himself, he got his neighbor to 
read it to him. Numbers might be seen flocking to the lower 
end of the church, and forming a little congregation round 
the "Scripture-reader." Many persons far advanced in life 
actually learned to read for the purpose of searching the 
Oracles of God. Such was the general excitement that at 
last the tavern and the alehouse often became the scenes of 
religious discussion. The king found it necessary to dis- 
courage, by a proclamation, these public debates. 

Nor did the movement affect only the lower classes. In 
1519, Erasmus wrote to Luther that "he [Luther] had friends 
in England who thought very highly of his writings, and 
those even men of high rank." The Gospel produced a great 
agitation at Cambridge University. Here it was that Thomas 
Bilney, who has been called the father of the English Refor- 
mation, proclaimed the truth which he had found in the 
New Testament and the writings of Luther. His influence 
was very extensive through the labors of those who learned 
the truth from him. Especially the conversion of George 
Stafford, a man of deep learning and holy life, as well as that 
of his friends, Thomas Arthur, Thistle, Fooke, Loude, 
Warner, and others, — all college men, — spread alarm 
among the .adherents of the Romish superstition. But above 
them all rose Hugh Latimer, who had formerly conducted 
violent debates with the adherents of the true doctrine, and 
who had been, to use his own words, "as obstinate a papist 
as any in England." Through Bilney's service he became 
a diligent seeker after the truth, and soon worked jointly 
with his friend in the conversion of the multitudes. Latimer 
was later made bishop, and was, like his friends Cranmer and 
Fox, a decided Lutheran until near the close of his life. 
There was at Cambridge a house called the White House, 
so situated as to permit the timid members of the various 
colleges to enter at the rear without being noticed. Here 
these persons used to assemble who desired to read the Bible 
and the works of the German Reformers. The priests called 
this house "Germany," and whenever a group of university 

Four Hundred Years. 17 



258 WHEN ENGLAND ALMOST BECAME LUTHERAN. 

men were seen walking in that direction, the cry was heard, 
"There are the Germans going to Germany!" "We are not 
Germans," was the reply, "neither are we Romans!" At last 
as many as seven colleges were pervaded with the leaven of 
the truth: Pembroke, St. John's, Queen's, King's, Cajus, 
Bennet's, and Peterhouse. The Gospel was also proclaimed 
in the church of St. Augustine, in St. Mary's, in the chapel 
of the university, and in sundry other places. Thus a great 
awakening resulted through the service of Bilney, and that 
it took place in the Lutheran spirit is evinced by the cir- 
cumstance that the converted persons read and spread the 
writings of Luther, and were publicly known and designated 
as the followers and disciples of Luther. When Bilney, at 
the outbreak of a violent persecution, was ordered to London, 
he received an injunction not to preach Luther's doctrines, 
"I will not preach Luther's doctrines, if there are any peculiar 
to him," he said, "but I can and must preach the doctrine 
of Jesus Christ, although Luther should preach it, too." 

A similar movement was noted at the other great uni- 
versity, Oxford. In the year 1526, says Mr. Wood in his 
History of the Oxford Academy, "the followers of Luther held 
private meetings at Oxford, and confessed the truth with 
such constancy that they preferred to be imprisoned all their 
lifetime, or even be reduced to ashes together with their 
books, rather than revoke the received doctrine." Li 1627, 
mention is again made of a society of Lutherans in con- 
nection with Corpus Christi College at Oxford. 

Burnet points out the fact that until the year 1531 "there 
was no dispute [in England] about the presence of Christ 
in the Sacrament; for the writings of Zwingli came later 
into England; and hitherto they had only seen Luther's 
works, and those written hy his followers/' And yet the 
Reformation had gained so much ground at that time that 
the Romish party was filled with alarm and despair. Thomas 
More, the famous champion of Romish abuses in England, 
wrote about this time to another great advocate of the 
Roman system, Cochlaeus: "Germany now daily bringeth 

N monsters more deadly than Africa was wont to do; 



WHEN ENGLAND AXMOST BECAME LUTHERAN. 259 

but alas, she is not alone. Numbers of Englishmen who 
would not a few years ago even hear of Luther's name 
mentioned are now publishing his praises. England now is 
like the sea which swells and heaves before a great storm, 
without any wind stirring it." 

Where the blind papist could not see the wind stirring 
England, others recognized the Spirit of the Lord blowing 
into the valley filled with bones, and waking them to the 
Gk)spel light and life. In 1526, Tyndale completed his version 
of the New Testament. This splendid translation is the basis 
of our English Bible to-day, about 90 per cent, of Tyndale's 
version being maintained in the so-called Authorized Version 
of 1611, which is the standard of English speech the world 
over. It is now almost certain that Tyndale labored on this 
translation for a time under the direct guidance of Luther. 
Certainly he made use of Luther's New Testament. His 
introduction to the Epistle to the Romans is almost literally 
translated from Luther. Cochlaeus writes: "Two English 
apostates [Tyndale and Frith] who had been somewhile 
at Wittenberg, were in hopes that all the people of England 
would shortly become Lutherans, with or without the king's 
consent, through the instrumentality of Luther's New Testa- 
ment, which they translated into English." King Henry 
likewise ascribes Tyndale's version to "Luther's devices," 
and the Bishop of London declared that "maintainers of 
Luther?s sect" had "prepared the translation." At all events, 
Luther and his friends were fully advised of this translation 
of the New Testament, for in the diary of Spalatin this 
passage occurs: "Bushe told us that six thousand copies of 
the New Testament in the English language had been 
printed at Worms, and that this translation had been made 
by an Englishman, sojourning there with two o^her natives 
of Britain, who was skilled in seven languages, Hebrew, 
Greek, Latin, Italian, Spanish, English, and Dutch." 

Not the persecution of its enemies, but the entanglement 
of its friends with British politics brought the Lutheran 
movement in England to a stop, so far as its leadership 
in English Protestantism was concerned. True, the most 



260 WHEN ENGLAND ALMOST BECAME LUTHERAN. 

powerful figure in English life of that period. Bishop Cran- 
mer, was at heart and by association with Lutheran reformers 
on the Continent more a Lutheran than anything else. His 
personal relations to the German Reformers, however, were 
not so much the outcome of spiritual as of political associa- 
tions. Cranmer was at this most critical juncture of Eng^lish 
history chief adviser to King Henry VIII, a self-willed, 
passionate, and tyrannical monarch, who appears to have 
placed everything in a subordinate x)osition to the advance- 
ment of his power, pleasure, and profit. Also, King Henry 
was a bigoted papist. From the time he first heard of Luther, 
his indignation broke forth. No sooner did the decree of 
the Diet of Worms, pronouncing the imperial ban upon 
Luther, reach England, than he gave orders that the pope's 
bull against the Reformer's writings should be carried into 
execution. On the 12th of May, 1521, Thomas Wolsey, 
Chancellor of England and Cardinal, repaired in solemn pro- 
cession to St. Paul's Church. The priesthood and many 
members of the nobility accompanied him, the ambassadors 
of the pope joined the cavalcade, and the several parties that 
composed it were carrying the writings of the poor monk of 
Wittenberg. On reaching the church, Wolsey deposited his 
cardinal's hat upon the altar, and the Bishop of Rochester 
preached a sermon against Luther's heresy. After this the 
attendants brought forward the writings of Luther, which 
were then publicly burned. Such was the first public an- 
nouncement of the Reformation to the people of England. 
King Henry did not rest satisfied with this triumph. He 
conceived that the moment had arrived for an exhibition 
of his learning. He gave to the world his '^Defense of the 
Seven Sacraments, against Martin Luther, by the most In- 
vincible King of England and of France, Lord of Ireland, 
Henry, the Eighth of that name." In his treatment of the 
Reformer, Henry was not sparing of hard epithets, styling 
his adversary successively an infernal wolf, a venomous 
serpent, and a limb of the devil. The public of the day 
set no bounds to the praises of this book. "The most learned 
work that ever the sun saw," is the expression of one. *1t 



WHEN ENGLAND ALMOST BECAME LUTHERAN. 261 

can only be compared to the works of Saint Augustine," 
said others. The pope declared that the king's book could 
not be composed but by the aid of the Holy Spirit, and con- 
ferred upon Henry the title of "Defender of the Faith" — 
still borne by the sovereigns of England! 

Luther read Henry's book with a smile, mingled with 
impatience and indignation. The misstatements and insults 
it contained, above all the air of pity and contempt for the 
Reformer which the author affected, irritated Luther to the 
highest degree. A furious lion, he turned upon his pursuers, 
and set himself determinedly to crush his enemies. His 
friends tried in vain to appease him. "I won't be gentle to 
the king of England," said he, and, in truth, he wasn't. Li 
his reply, Luther reproaches Henry with having supported 
his statements merely by decrees and doctrines of men, and 
then proceeds in detail to refute the king's book, exposing 
his arguments, one after the other, with remarkable clear- 
ness, energy, and knowledge of the Scriptures and of church 
history, but also with a boldness, contempt, and violence 
which need not surprise us. "It must still come to pass>" 
he exclaims in conclusion, "that popes, bishops, priests, monks, 
princes, devils, death, sin, — and all that is not Jesus Christ 
or in Jesus Christ, — must fall and perish before the power 
of the Gospel which I, Martin Luther, have preached." 

Thus spake an imfriended monk to one of the greatest 
monarchs of his age. In reply. King Henry wrote to the 
Dukes of Saxony, beseeching them "by all that is most sacred 
promptly to extinguish the cursed sect of Luther. If this 
heretical doctrine lasts, shed blood without hesitation, in 
order that this abominable sect may disappear from under 
the heavens." As for his own kingdom, Henry was deter- 
mined to destroy every vestige of the hated heresy. During 
the following ten years he issued a number of very drastic 
decrees against every form of departure from the Roman 
faith. Owners of Lutheran books were required to give them 
up to be burned. Among the books specified in the royal 
orders as contrary to the true religion were Tyndale's New 
Testament, Luther's Revelation of Antichrist, his explanation 



262 WHEN ENGLAND ALMOST BECAME LUTHERAN. 

of the Lord's Prayer, his commentary on Galatians, etc. The 
adherents of the Reformer were called "Luther's and Tyn- 
dale's sect." In spite of these prohibitions a vast number of 
the proscribed books were imported into England, among 
them many Tyndale Bibles, printed in Germany and the 
Netherlands because of this persecution. Thomas Bilney, 
the father of English Lutheranism, was burned at the stake 
1530. * Tyndale's companion, John Frith, an Oxford scholar, 
suffered martyrdom at Smithfield, London, 1533, and three 
years later Tyndale was burned at Louvain. A number of 
other noble confessors suffered martyrdom in England at 
this time. Among the monsters which raged against the 
truth, the names of Cardinal Wolsey and Thomas More 
have become execrable above others. Bishop Stockesly of 
London boasted on his deathbed that he had delivered fifty 
heretics to the executioner. Simply the reading of Tyndale's 
Bible was sufficient cause for imprisonment, and refusal to 
recant the doctrines of Luther was deemed a crime worthy 
of death. The fanatical Bishop of Lincoln even caused an 
old man to be burned who was guilty only of reading the 
Bible on private walks through woods and meadows. 

Henry VIII, as we have noted, was under the complete 
control of the priesthood, and had written his book against 
Luther in a fit of sincere horror of the German Reformer's 
teachings. As late as 1525 he made a treaty with France 
for the suppression of the Turk and "of the Lutheran sect, 
hardly less dangerous than the Turk." However, his friend- 
ship for the pope experienced a gradual cooling-off. The 
causes that led to his complete estrangement from the Roman 
Church were complex. He contemplated the temporal ad- 
vantages which might accrue to him if he should cut loose 
the Church of England from the rule of Rome, and make 
himself head and master. Pie thus came to seek the friend- 
ship of the German princes, secretly at first, although he 
had not yet renounced his Romish belief, nor suffered any 
of the worst Roman abuses to be abolished in his country. 
But it was especially his second matrimonial venture, his 
divorce from Catherine of Aragon and marriage with Anne 



WHEN ENGLAND ALMOST BECAME LUTHEBAN. 263 

Boleyn, which brought about his final break with the pope. 
Enamored with Anne Boleyn, then a lady at his court, he 
demanded from Pope Clement VII an annulment of his 
marriage with Catherine. The pope, however, was not willing 
to incur the enmity of Charles V, the mighty emperor of 
Germany, who was a nephew of Catherine, When the pope 
began to pursue a policy of procrastination, in the hope that 
the royal lover's ardor for Anne Boleyn would be worn out 
by waiting, Henry suddenly dismissed his chancellor, Wolsey, 
whom he suspected of managing the affair with greater loyalty 
to the pope than to his master. Wolsey died broken-hearted. 
It was at this time that Thomas Cranmer, a young theologian, 
who had warmly supported King Henry's contention that his 
marriage to Catherine should be annulled, was made the 
trusted advisor of the king. Cranmer was sent to the Conti- 
nent with the royal commission to gain approbation of various 
universities of the Continent for this marriage, and also to 
negotiate for the political support of the Protestant princes. 
The Lutheran princes, however, insisted that agreement in 
doctrine must be established before they would enter an 
alliance with him. Burnet remarks on this point: "It can- 
not be denied that the Protestants proved their sincerity in 
this matter, such as became men of conscience, who were 
actuated by true principles, and not by maxims of policy. 
For if these," that is, considerations of political advantage, 
"had governed them, they would have shown themselves more 
compliant with so great a prince, who was then alienated 
from the pope and on very ill terms with the emperor.'* 
Cranmer then invited expression of opinion from the Witten- 
berg theologians. Luther openly proclaimed it as his opin- 
ion that the separation would be a greater enormity than 
the marriage of Henry and Catherine had been (Catherine 
was his brother's widow). Such appears to have been the 
prevalent view in Germany. It was during this residence 
in Germany that Cranmer became acquainted with the cele- 
brated Osiander, then pastor at Nuremberg, and having 
formed an attachment to the niece of his friend, was united 
to her early in the following year. It is not generally known 



264 WHKK ENGLAND ALMOST BECAME LUTHERAN. 

that the greatest figure in the history of the Beformation 
of £nglaiidy Thomas Cranmer, married a Lutheran girl. 

But the royal will was not to be thwarted by the scruples 
of theologians. The alliance with Catherine was declared 
null and void, and the nuptials with Anne Boleyn were 
celebrated. Cranmer was made Archbishop of Canterbury, 
and Henry assumed the title of Protector and Head of the 
Church of England. When he refused to obey a summons of 
the pope to appear in Home, the great papal curse was 
launched against him. This was the end of spiritual, rela- 
tions between Henry and the pope and the heginning of the 
Anglican Reformation. Henry declared himself the head 
of the Anglican Church. He would be king and pope in one. 
Yet he was by no means won over to the doctrinal position 
of the Keformers. The thought that it might be said that 
he had become an adherent to the faith which he had con- 
demned as hell-broth and Satanic virus in his book against 
Luther was unbearable to him. His plan included no Refor- 
mation of church doctrine. The greater abuses, indeed, were 
to be ameliorated, above all, the authority of the pope was to 
be broken, but the doctrinal position of the Anglican Church 
was not to be affected by this change in spiritual overlords. 
Once more it was thought that the opportunity was come 
to strike a political bargain with the Lutheran princes of 
Germany. And again the Lutheran nobility stood firm. In 
1532, Cranmer delivered letters from the king to the Elector 
John and Duke Philip of Lueneberg. At Nuremberg he had 
a private interview with the crown prince of Saxony in the 
presence of Spalatin. On a subsequent occasion he is even 
said to have promised the assistance of King Henry in case 
the Lutheran princes should become inveigled into war with 
the emperor. But those splendid men could not be bought 
by the promise even of such emoluments of power to their 
cause. Prince John Frederick replied in his own handwriting 
that "agreement as to the Articles of Faith must first be 
reached between the King and the Evangelicals (i, e,, Lu- 
therans) ; they and their allies would not turn aside from 
the Augsburg Confession" (Related by Seckendorf.) 



WHEN ENGLAND ALMOST BECAME LUTHEBAN. 265 

In the year 1536, Dr. Robert Barnes was sent by King 
Henry to Wittenberg to prepare the way for new negotia- 
tions. There was some hope then, it seemed, that Melanch- 
thon would be invited to England to introduce evangelical 
reforms. Luther wrote at this time: "Who knows what God 
intends to do? His wisdom is greater than ours.'* The 
Elector of Saxony wrote that he was willing to enter into 
negotiations looking to an alliance for mutual defense, but 
added: "Never shall we cast away the right and pure 
doctrine of the Gospel which we . . . confessed before the 
emi)eror in the Augsburg convention." And having exhorted 
the king to carry through a reform of popish abuses, he again 
says : "For our own part, we shall, through the help of Ood, 
never cast away the doctrine which we confess/' 

Indeed, matters had at this time taken a turn in England 
which led- many to hoi)e that king and people might be gained 
over for the evangelical truth. The movement against the 
various superstitious practises of popery was becoming more 
pronounced, and the hopes of Grerman Protestants were 
greatly animated. An attempt was made to gain a better 
understanding with the English divines. Myconius, a Lu- 
theran clergyman, and Burckhardt, vice-chancellor to the 
Elector of Saxony, brought a letter from Melanchthon to 
the king, expressing the joy which had been kindled in the 
hearts of all good men by His Majesty's alacrity in the 
work of Reformation. These Germans were, unhappily, 
doomed to bitter disappointment. The Romish party in 
English x)olitics prevented a discussion of the Mass and of 
celibacy. In spite of Cranmer's efforts no opportunity was 
given the German ambassadors to state their views of those 
principles on which alone a real Reformation of the Ohurch 
could be brought about. Only those points of doctrine which 
the Church of England had already adopted from the Augs- 
burg Confession were reaffirmed, and this only after much 
wearisome discussion (by writing) back and forth. It appears 
that the German ambassadors received scurvy treatment in 
other ways. Cranmer complains that "they be very ill lodged, 
for besides a multitude of rats daily and nightly running 



266 WHEN ENGLAND ALMOST BECAME LUTHEBAN. 

in their chambers, the kitchen standeth directly against their 
parlour, and by reason thereof the house savoreth so ill that 
it offendeth all men that come into it." We are not surprised 
to read that the Lutheran visitors were all in haste to take 
their leave. This was in 1536. 

The German Reformers were finally disillusionized by the 
laws which Henry VIII promulgated in 1539 for the sup- 
pression of the evangelical faith in his dominion. These 
laws, known as the Bloody Statutes, were enacted in spite 
of the vigorous opposition of Cranmer, whose eloquence and 
learning on this occasion extorted admiration even from his 
enemies. The king himself was struck by the force of 
Cranmer's arguments, but he had gone so far that there was 
now no drawing back. The king felt that his honor as 
"Defender of the Catholic Faith" and his very throne were 
endangered, if the country should become divided in its 
religious opinion. The Six Articles were designed to pre- 
serve the unity of faith in England. They maintained the 
Roman doctrine of the change of the elements into the body 
and blood of Christ in the Sacrament, forbade the marriage' 
of the clergy, and insisted on auricular confession to the 
priest. The penalties inflicted upon transgressors of these 
regulations were horrible. They condemned to death hy fire 
all who should speak, preach, and write against the Roman 
doctrine in these three points! 

Nothing could exceed the exasperation and disappointment 
produced among the German Reformers by the publication 
of this sanguinary and tyrannical law. The truth was cour- 
teously, but very plainly told by Melanchthon in an epistle 
addressed to Henry himself. The indignation of Luther 
was expressed in less measured language. "I am rejoiced," 
he said in a letter to the Elector of Saxony, "that the king 
has at last thrown off the mask. He demanded to be chosen 
as head and defender of the Gospel in Germany. Away with 
such a head ! His power and his wealth have so inflated him 
that he would be adored as a divinity. His craft is such as 
might well qualify him for the popedom itself." 

At this point we may suitably terminate our study of 



WHEN ENGLAND ALMOST BECAME LUTHERAN. 267 

that strange and little known period of Reformation history^ 
when England almost became Lutheran. Not that the Lu- 
theran influence came to an end when the negotiations with 
the Lutheran princes fell through. Nor did the persecution 
which followed the publication of the Six Articles crush 
out the Evangelical Lutheran principle, or remove it as an 
active force from English life. As late as 1548, Cranmer 
translated a catechism written by Justus Jonas, the friend 
of Luther; and the Anglican Confession, the Two-and-forty 
(later Thirty-nine) Articles adopted in 1551, in part literally 
reproduces the Augsburg Confession. But the Zwinglian 
strain now gained the ascendancy. In his translation of 
Jonas's catechism Cranmer altered the text in a manner to 
conform to the Reformed doctrine of the Lord's Supper. 
And the Thirty-nine Articles contain the Reformed view 
concerning the Sacraments. The leaders of Anglicanism at 
that time were either Calvinists and Zwinglians, or were 
middle-of-the-road men and ecclesiastical diplomats, like 
Bucer. Thus it was that England did not become Lutheran. 
As an organized force in English history, Lutheranism was 
killed by politics. A lewd and tyrannical king held the reins 
of power. Roman Catholic bigotry at one time made him 
an enemy of the Reformation, expediency ranged him among 
her friends for a season, but when the loyalty of Lutheran 
princes could not be bought, he turned against his evangelical 
subjects in the cruel rage characteristic of unbalanced tyrants. 
When the politico-ecclesiastical tinkerers under Edward VI 
got through their work, they had compounded a confession 
which is neither Lutheran nor Calvinistic, but Anglican. 
The clear stream of Lutheranism was swallowed up in the 
muddy, Anglican waters. Yet it should not be forgotten 
that, in the words of old Lithenius, it was "Luther, the 
great instrument of God in reforming the British Church, 
who opened the way to England and Scotland to extricate 
themselves from papal servitude." And the imperishable 
legacy of Lutheranism to the English-speaking world is the 
English Bible. 



268 LUTHEa'S END. 

Luther's End. 

Rev. E. Haebtel, Chicago, 111. 

It is hard for us to realize that a man whose literary 
products fill twenty-five large volumes; who constantly 
lectured to large classes at the University; whose corre- 
spondence on a vast variety of subjects was enormous; 
who with the aid of several friends rendered the Bible into 
the vernacular; who preached several sermons a week; who 
oould find time to compose a number of powerful hymns and 
set some of them to music ; who could in his home and social 
life maintain a most cheerful spirit, — it is hard for us to 
realize that such a man could be otherwise than physically 
strong and of rugged health. The familiar portrait of 
Luther representing him as he appeared toward the end of 
his career tends to strengthen the impression that he was 
a robust man and of great strength. As a matter of fact, 
however, Luther was far from being the well man he is 
popularly supposed to have been. Very early in life he was 
attacked by the calculus, from which painful disorder he 
suffered severely. In December, 1537, he writes : "I am little 
more than a benumbed and frozen carcass." At another 
time he said: ^^This toothache and earache I am always 
suffering from are worse than the plague. When I was at 
Coburg, in 1530, I was tormented with a noise and buzzing 
in my ears, just as though there were some wind tearing 
through my head. The devil had something to do with it." 

A man was complaining to him one day of the itch ; said 
Luther: "I should be very glad to change with you, and to 
give you ten florins into the bargain. You don't know what 
a horrible thing this vertigo of mine is. Here, all to-day, , 
I have not been able to read a letter through, nor even two 
or three lines of the Psalter consecutively. I do not get 
beyond three or four words, when, buzz, buzz I the noise 
begins again, and often I am near falling off my chair with 
the pain. But the itch, that's nothing; nay, it is rather 
a beneficial complaint." 

One day, when he had been preaching at Smalcald, he 



lutheb's end. 269 

had, after dinner, a severe attack of his malady, whereupon 
he knelt down and prayed fervently: **0 my Qod, my Lord 
Jesus! Thou knowest with what zeal I have preached Thy 
Word; if it be to the glory of Thy name, come to my succor; 
if not, close my eyes." 

"My head is so weak, so unsteady, that I can neither read 
nor write, especially when fasting." (February 9, 1543.) 

"I am feeble and weary of life. I would fain bid adieu 
to the world, which is now given over to the Evil One. God 
grant me a favorable hour for my departure and a prosperous 
journey. Amen." (March 14, 1543.) 

To Amsdorf he said, on the 18th of August in the same 
year: "I write this to you after supper, for when fasting^ 
I cannot, without great danger, even look at a book or a paper. 
I don't understand this wretched malady at all; whether it 
is one of Satan's blows at me or the effects of nature's decay." 

"I take it that my malady is made up, first, of the 
ordinary weakness of advanced age; secondly, of the results 
of my long labors and habitual tension of thought; thirdly^ 
above all, of the blows of Satan; if this be so, there is no 
medicine in the world that will cure me." (November 7, 
1543.) 

In this same year his old enemy returned with alarming 
severity. An abscess also appeared on his left leg. Finding 
that a fresh breaking out of it seemed to relieve his head» 
his friend, Ratzeberger, the Elector's physician, applied 
a seton to keep the issue open. 

Little wonder, then, that the thought of an early death 
was ever present with him. •Thus on the occasion of the 
death of a pious man he said : "This man fell gently asleep ; 
he did not know that he died, and does not yet know that 
he is dead; for he fell asleep in the Word and knowledge 
of Christ. Dear Loi*d Jesus, grant unto me soon such a quiet 
and blessed death, and take me also out of this misery and 
vale of tears to Thyself." In a letter addressed to Melanch- 
thon, dated April 18, 1541, after relating his sufferings, he 
says: "May it please Christ to remove my soul into the 



270 hjther's end. 

peace of the Lord. By the grace of God, I am ready and 
desirous to go. I have lived out and finished the course 
assigned to me by God. Oh, may my soul, wearied with 
so long a journey on earth, now ascend into heaven!" 

"I have no time to write to you at any length, my dear 
Probst, for though I am overwhelmed with age and weari- 
ness, old, cold, and half blind" (Luther had been for some 
time afflicted with a disease in one of his eyes), "as the 
saying is, yet I am not permitted as yet to take my repose." 

During the last two or three years of his life his enemies 
from time to time spread abroad rumors of his death, adding 
embellishing accounts with most tragic and fantastic details. 
To put an end to this annoyance, Luther in 1545 printed in 
German and Italian a pamphlet entitled, "Lies of the 
Italians Touching the Alleged Death of Martin Luther." 

His last days were occupied in the difficult and delicate 
task of bringing about a reconciliation between the Counts of 
Mansfeld, in whose domain he had been born. "A week, 
more or less," he writes to Count Albert, who had asked him 
to come to Eisleben as arbitrator, "will not prevent me from 
coming, though, truly, 1 am much occupied with other affairs. 
But I feel that I shall lie down on my death-bed with joy 
when I have seen my dear lords reconciled and once more 
friends." 

Dissensions had arisen between the counts concerning 
certain revenues from the mines and other rights. Luther 
had already entreated them in God's name amicably to adjust 
the matters; but their quarrels only seemed to increase in 
bitterness. They had now agreed so far as to invite his 
mediation, and Luther, though sick and overburdened with 
work, did not feel that he could decline to serve his masters 
and early home with his prayer and counsel. 

In October, 1545, he, accordingly, went there with 
Melanchthon, but the visit proved fruitless as the coimts 
were suddenly called away to war. At Christmas time he 
again journeyed to Mansfeld accompanied by Melanchthon. 
The proceedings had hardly begun when Melanchthon was 



'lutheb's end. 271 

taken seriously ill, and his anxiety for his friend would not 
permit him to remain. At Wittenberg he preached for the 
last time on January 17, 1546. On the 23d of January he 
started on his third journey, this time to Eisleben, which 
had been appointed for the conference. lie took with him 
his three sons, to whom he wanted to show his old home, their 
tutor, his own servant, and Aurifaber. He had hoped to 
reach his destination already on the following day, but the 
breaking of the ice, followed by a heavy flood in the river 
Saale, obliged him to sojourn in Halle at the house of his 
friend Dr. Jonas until the 28th. To his wife he wrote: 
"Dear Katie: We arrived at eight o'clock this morning in 
Halle, but could not proceed to Eisleben; for an Anabaptist 
met us with waves of water and great blocks of ice, which 
covered the land and threatened to baptize us. Nor could 
we retrace our steps on account of the river Mulda, but were 
obliged to remain at Halle between two streams. Not as if 
we were anxious to drink of these waters, for we substitute 
good beer of Torgau and good Rhine wine for the water, and 
refresh and comfort ourselves therewith until the Saale shall 
have done raging." 

To his friends he said, "Dear friends, we are mighty good 
comrades; we eat and drink together,. but the time will come 
when we must die. I am now going to Eisleben to reconcile 
the Counts of Mansfeld, whose temper of mind I know. 
When Christ undertook to reconcile His heavenly Father 
and the world. He had to die for them. God grant that it 
may be the same with me." 

It was probably then that he brought Jonas as a present 
the beautiful white goblet which is still preserved at Nurem- 
berg. The Latin couplet on it is to this effect: 

Luther this glass, himself a glass, doth on his friend bestow, 
That each himself a brittle glass may by this token know. 

On the 28th the travelers, who were joined by Jonas, 
ventured the still perilous crossing of the Saale, and reached 
Eisleben in the evening, where the Counts of Mansfeld, with 
several other notables, were waiting for Luther. Shortly 



272 lutheb'b end.* 

before reaching the city, Luther went some distance on foot, 
became overheated, and when he resumed his seat in the 
wagon, such a chill blast struck him from the rear that he 
was attacked by severe pains in the chest and great dizziness. 
At Eisleben he quickly recovered, and preached on the 
following Sunday. To Melanchthon he wrote: '^Now I feel 
quite well again, but for how long I know not, for you cannot 
trust old age." His sons he permitted to visit relatives in 
Mansfeld. 

Luther was comfortably quartered at the Drachstedt, 
a house belonging to the city, and inhabited by the town- 
clerk, Albert. The arbitration proceedings were commenced 
at once in the house where he was staying, but very slow 
progress was made on account of the mutual distrust of the 
contesting parties. Luther was much discouraged, and even 
suggested that the Elector be requested to command his 
return on urgent business, as he was under the impression 
that they would not permit him to depart without having* 
accomplished the object of their meeting. He was also much 
incensed at the quibbling of the lawyers, and because they 
backed up each party to stand on his imagined rights. 

During this time Luther's health seemed to be in fairly 
good condition. His appetite and sleep were good. He 
preached four times, ordained two pastors, and partook twice 
of the Sacrament. His last sermon was preached on 
February 14th and concluded with the words: "This and 
much more could be said of this Gospel, but I am too weak; 
we shall have to pause here. May God grant His grace that 
we accept His precious Word with thanksg^iving, grow and 
increase in the knowledge and faith of His Son, our Lord 
Jesus Christ, and remain steadfast in the confession of His 
Word unto our end. Amen." 

In the mean time his Katie was being consumed by worry 
in Wittenberg, and he sought to relieve her anxiety by 
writing her ^ve letters in fourteen days. They were full 
of affection, comfort, and humor. In one of them he jestingly 
chides her for her lack of faith in the words: "Dear Katie: 
"^^•d St. John and the Small Catechism. . . . You want to 



lutheb's end. 273 

do the caring instead of God, just as though He were not 
ahnighty and could not create ten Doctor Martins if the 
old one drowned in the Saale, or died by the fireplace, or 
in Wolfs bird-trap. Spare me with your cares, for I know 
One who can care for me better than you or all the angels. 
He lies in a manger and hangs upon a virgin's breast; but 
He, nevertheless, sits on the right hand of God the Father 
Almighty. Therefore abide in peace. Amen." And three 
days later he thanks "the holy, anxious mistress," the "sacro- 
sanct Mrs. Doctor," for her great concern which will not 
permit her to sleep; "for since you have been caring for us, 
the fire wanted to consume us in our quarters, almost in front 
of the door of my chamber, and yesterday, no doubt but by 
virtue of your care, a stone almost fell on my head and 
crushed it as in a mousetrap"; and then he continues, 
"I worry that if you do not stop worrying, the earth may at 
last swallow us up, and all the elements pursue us. Do you 
thus learn the Catechism and the Creed? You must pray 
and let God do the caring, as we read, 'Cast thy burden upon 
the Lord, and He will sustain thee.' Ps. 55." 

Of the voluptuous life of the princes he wrote to his wife : 
'*You may teU Philip to correct his postil, for he did not 
understand why the Lord in the Gospel calls riches thorns. 
Here is the school to learn that. But it fills me with dread 
to think that in the Scriptures the thorns are threatened 
with ^e" 

On the 10th of February he wrote: "We are, God be 
praised, quite well. Dr. Jonas wanted a sore leg, and acci- 
dentally bumped it against a chest. So great is envy among 
men that he would not even let me be the only one to have 
a sore leg." 

This sore leg evidently caused Luther not a little anxiety. 
The ointment with which the ulcer was to be kept open had 
been forgotten, and at Eisleben the wound was almost 
healed up. Intending to spare his wife all worry, he asks 
Melanchthon to send a special messenger with the ointment. 
He writes, "You know how dangerous that is." And after- 
Four Hundred Years. 18 



274 LUTHER'S END. 

ward Dr. Hatzeberger actually ascribed Luther's unexpected 
death to the neglect of the seton. 

On the 14th of February Luther reported to his wife 
the encoiu-aging progress of the proceedings, and announced 
his early return. The lords had come to an agreement on 
all points of the dispute except two or three, and the two 
counts, Gebhard and Albrecht, had been reconciled. "Our 
young nobles are all gaiety now; they drive the ladies out 
in sleighs and make the horses' bells jingle a pretty tune." 
He was quite cheerful now, but spoke much of death, re- 
marking that he would soon go to Wittenberg to lay himself 
into a coffin, and "give the worms a fat doctor to devour." 

On the 16th an agreement was actually reached. On the 
morning of the 17th Luther was so ill that the counts en- 
treated him not to quit his apartment to participate in the 
closing session, in which the stipulations were finally agreed 
upon, and later submitted to him for his signature. He spent 
the forenoon in conversation with Jonas, Coelius, and his 
God. "Here at Eisleben I was baptized," he once remarked, 
"suppose I should now stay here?" 

Before supper he complained of oppression of the chest, 
and had himself rubbed with warm cloths. The evening 
meal he shared with the others in the dining-hall, one floor 
below his rooms. He was apparently well again. He ate 
as usual, and his conversation was the usual free mixtiu'e 
of seriousness and humor. He spoke of death and recognition 
after death, affirming that, as Adam recognized Eve on awak- 
ing from sleep, so we would recognize one another after death. 
No one suspected what was before them. 

He then arose to retire, followed by his two younger sons, 
Martin and Paul, who had returned from Mansfeld, and 
Coelius. According to his custom he remained for a long 
time at the window engaged in silent prayer. Coelius soon 
came down again, and Aurifaber went to the room. 

Suddenly Luther was attacked by extreme pains in his 
chest. Aurifaber hastened to the wife of Count Albrecht, 
who was said to have a remedy for this. Jonas and Coelius, 
who had speedily returned, endeavored to increase the circula- 



lutheb's end. 275 

tion by rubbing him with warm cloths. After the count had 
given him the remedy, the attack seemed to be over. He laid 
himself down on a leathern sofa and slept peacefully until 
ten o'clock. 

On awaking, he said to those present, "What, are you still 
there? Will you not, dear friends, also retire?" On their 
replying that they would remain with him, he arose to go 
to his bed in an adjoining room. When he crossed the 
threshold, he said in Latin: "Into Thy hands I commend 
my spirit; Thou hast redeemed me, Thou faithful God." 
After he had slumbered peacefully for about two hours, the 
attack was renewed. "O Lord God," he exclaimed, "I am 
in such pains! Ah, dear Dr. Jonas, I think I shall remain 
here at Eisleben where I was bom and baptized." Again he 
arose and went unaided to the sofa. The oppression in- 
creased. When continued rubbing with warmed cloths and 
other remedial measures finally brought on perspiration, hope 
was expressed by those present, but Luther said : "It is a cold 
sweat of death; I shall give up my spirit, for the sickness 
is increasing." Then he prayed: "O my heavenly Father, 
Thou God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Thou God 
of all comfort, I thank Thee that Thou hast revealed unto 
me Thy dear Son, Jesus Christ, on whom I believe, whom 
I have preached and confessed, whom I have loved and 
lauded, whom the wicked pope and all the ungodly abuse, 
persecute, and blaspheme. I pray Thee, my Lord Jesus 
Christ, let my poor soul be committed into Thy keeping. 
O heavenly Father, I know assuredly that, although I must 
give up this body and be removed from this life, I shall 
still abide with Thee eternally, and that no one can pluck 
me out of Thy hand." He also comforted himself with his 
favorite text, John 3, 16, and with the words of the 68th 
Psalm: "He that is our God is the God of salvation." 
Thrice he was heard to repeat the words, "Father, into Thy 
hands I commend my spirit. Thou hast redeemed me. Thou 
faithful God." Hereupon he was silent. While his wrists 
were being bathed, Dr. Jonas and Coelius asked him, "Rev- 
erend father, are you willing to die faithful to Christ and 



276 LUTHEB'S E27D. 

the doctrine you have preached ?" and he answered distinctly, 
"Yes." He then turned over on his right side and slept. 
In less than a quarter of an hour he gently and peacefully, 
without the slightest struggle or convulsion, yielded up his 
spirit. The Lord had called him home between two and 
three o'clock in the morning of Thursday, February 18, 1546. 

Jonas at once notified the Elector. Mrs. Katie received 
the sad news on the 19th, and Melanchthon first announced 
the death to the students in his lecture on Romans. After 
this a posted bulletin informed the university and the city 
of the departure of the great Reformer. 

The Counts of Mansfeld desired to keep the body in their 
country, Luther's native land, but the Elector decided that 
it should be brought to Wittenberg, After two portraits had 
been made of his face, the body was wrapped in a long white 
garment and placed in a cofl^. It was then carried into 
St. Andrew's Church, where Dr. Jonas preached an excellent 
sermon from 1 Thess. 4, 13 — 18, and Coelius preached from 
Is. 57, 1. At twelve the body was carried out of the city, 
escorted by about 50 horsemen, under the command of the 
two Counts of Mansfeld, and a large number of people. 
Everywhere the procession was received by new moumerd 
and the tolling of bells. In Halle it was placed in the 
church for the night. On the 22d, at nine o'clock in the 
morning, Wittenberg was reached. At the Elster Gate the 
remains were met by an immense throng, and escorted to 
the Castle Church in solemn procession. It was preceded by 
the nobles representing the Elector, two Counts of Mansfeld, 
and about 65 horsemen. Behind the coffin rode the widow 
in a little carriage with some other gentlewomen and her 
daughter Margaret. She was followed, by Luther's three 
sons, John, Martin, and Paul, his brother, and other relatives. 
Back of them marched the rector of the university. Chan- 
cellor Brueck, and the entire faculty and students, the town- 
council, and the citizens. 

In the Castle Church Bugenhagen first preached from 
1 Thess. 4, 13, and in conclusion quoted Luther's prophecy 
and memorial inscription: "Living was I thy plague, and 



LUTHEB. 277 

dying will I be thy death, O pope!" Then Melanehthon de- 
livered in Latin, on behalf of the universitj, a most eloquent 
tribute to his friend. 

Close to the pulpit from which Luther had so often 
preached the coffin was lowered into the vault. The grave 
having been filled up and properly secured, a brass plate 
was affixed upon it with this inscription : 



m 

I, MARTIN! LUTERISTHEOLO 



I 



GIJ¥.B-CORPUSHL SE'Q,t]I 
'an- ChRI STIMD XLV1X1I-! 
i^.| CALMAKTNFISIPBITIN PA 
T^l TRIA-S-MO CVANN T.XIU , j.^- j 

Vji M ii-D-x ml 




Tributes to Luther. 

Ret. O. C. Kbeinhedeb, St. Paul, Minn. 

The name and character of Martin Luther have not 
escaped the tongue and pen of vile slander and malicious 
calumny. Next to Jesus Christ, Johann Albrecht Bengel 
has said, no one has been more calumniated than Dr. Martin 
Luther, the apostles not escepted. Though mankind at large 
is to-day enjoying the beneficent fruits of Luther's life and 
labors, there still are those who hate and abhor his name, 
and think of him as the archheretic of the Christian Church, 
"Kome has never forgotten nor forgiven Luther. She sought 
his life while living, and she curses him in his grave. Profited 
by his labors beyond what she ever could have been without 



278 TRIBUTES TO LUTHER. 

him, she strains and chokes with anathemas upon his name 
and everything that savors of him. . . . Even while the 
free peoples of the earth are making grateful acknowledg- 
ments of the priceless boon that has come to them through 
his life and labors, press and platform hiss with stale vitupera- 
tions from the old enemy. And a puling Churchism outside 
of Home takes an ill -pleasure in following after her to gather 
and retail this vomit of malignity." i) And yet, "no man 
has been so much honored, no man — save the apostles — 
deserves so much to be held in grateful remembrance as 
Martin Luther, remarkable alike as a man, as a Christian, 
as a husband and father, as a theologian, as a Bible trans- 
lator, catechist, and hymnist, as the bold champion of the 
freedom of conscience, as the founder of the Lutheran 
Church, and as the chief leader of that Reformation which 
carried Christendom back to first principles, and urged it 
forward to new conquests." 2) The chosen instrument of 
God for the reformation of the Church, Luther's name "has 
become a household word, a name that shines with greater 
luster than the name of Milton, of Shakespeare, or of Newton, 
because associated with more glorious triumphs ; a name that 
has left behind it a legacy that no other has rivaled — the 
legacy of an unshackled Christianity, an unclasped Bible, 
a preached Gospel." ^) "The ovafion to the memory of Martin 
Luther, on the four-hundredth anniversary of his birth, sur- 
passed in extent and enthusiasm everything that has in any 
age been rendered to the memory of mortal man. All de- 
nominations, all classes, all institutions, throughout every 
country in the world into which the blessings of the Refor- 
mation have penetrated, united spontaneously in celebrating 
his personal merits and his illustrious services to religion and 
progress, and raised him to a pedestal of fame which stands 
without a rival, and which can never perish. It was the 
grateful tribute of the modern world to him who is, humanly 



1) Dr. J. A. Seiss, Luther and the Reformation, p. 131. 

2) Philip Schaff, in Luther as a Reformer. 

3) Cumming's Lectures on the Apocalypse, p. 122. 



TRIBUTES TO LUTHER. 279 

speaking, acknowledged as its creator." ^) At the approaching 
celebration of the four-hundredth anniversary of the Refor- 
mation much, no doubt, will be said in praise of the man 
who was the mighty agent of the Lord of hosts in this 
epochal movement ; but surely no one can blame us for these 
words of praise, which are spoken not to deify the man, but to 
honor and gratefully to adore the goodness and mercy of 
Him who blessed the world through Martin Luther. 

The "titanic" and many-sided greatness, the "majestic 
genius," the noble qualities of mind and heart of "the modem 
world's foremost prophet" ^) have evoked from an admiring 
world the most glowing tributes all through the centuries 
that succeeded his heroic struggle for truth and righteous- 
ness, tributes that are indeed an "offering of flowers and 
fruit on the altar of the greatest memory which the heart 
of modem Christianity enshrines." ^ Nor have "alone his 
followers, the Lutherans, lavished on hi;n the highest 
praise."*^) "Romanists have emulated Protestants in his 
praise; Rationalists have seemed to venerate him whilst 
they were laboring to undo his work."^) No higher tribute 
was ever paid Luther by any of his followers than was that 
of the devoted and conscientious Romanist, Frederick von 
Schlegel, who said : "As to the intellectual power and great- 
ness of Luther, ... I think there are few even of his own 
disciples who appreciate him highly enough." 9) 

With respect to Luther's singular and overtowering great- 
ness as a man among men, the loftiest tributes have been 
paid him. Melanchthon, who surely knew him weU, and 
who had every opportunity to estimate the excellent and 
eminent qualities of mind and heart with which he was 



4) Prof. Wolf. 

5) Dr. McGiffert, Century, September, 1911. 

6) Krauth, Conservative Reformation, p. 22. 

7) Oeuvrea de Bossuet {Hiatoire dea Variations) , Vol. IV, p. 9. 

8) Krauth, Conservative Reformation, p. 46. 

9) Lectures on the History of Literature; New York, 1841, 
350. 



280 TBIBUTES TO LUTHEB. 

endowed, said: "Luther is too great, too wonderful for me 
to depict in words." "There was probably never created 
a more powerful human being, a more gigantic, full-pro- 
portioned man, in the highest sense of the term. All that 
belongs to human nature, all that goes to constitute a man, 
had a strongly-marKed development in him. He was a model 
man, one that might be shown to other beings in other parts 
of the universe as a specimen of collective manhood in its 
maturest growth." 10) "He was a complete man, I would say, 
an absolute man, one in whom matter and spirit were not 
divided. To call him a spiritualist, therefore, would be as 
great an error as to call him a sensualist. . . . He had 
something original, incomprehensible, miraculous, such as 
we find in all providential men, — something invincible, 
spirit-possessed." ^O "His moral courage, his undaunted 
firmness, his strong conviction, and the great revolution 
which he effected in society, place him in the first rank of 
historical characters. The form of the monk of Wittenberg, 
emerging from the receding gloom of the Middle Ages, 
appears towering above the sovereigns and warriors, states- 
men and divines of the sixteenth century, who were his con- 
temporaries, his antagonists, or his disciples." 12) "If we 
recall, among other great names in German history, the 
[Reformers Melanchthon and Zwingli, the Saxon electors, 
Frederick the Wise and John the Constant, Gustavus 
Adolphus and Frederick the Great; or, among intellectual 
celebrities, Klopstock and Lessing, Hamann and Herder, 
Goethe and Schiller ; or turn to the great religious reformers 
of the last centuries, Spener, Francke, Zinzendorf, Bengel, 
and Lavater, they all exhibit many features of relationship 
with Luther, and in some qualities may even surpass him, 
but none stands out a Luther, One is deficient in the poetic 
impulse or the fulness and versatility of his nature ; another 



10) Dr. Calvin E. Stowe, quoted in Seiss's Luther and the 
Reformation, p. 123. 

11) Heine. 

12) Cyclopaedia of British Society, Vol. XIII, p. 207. 



TBIBUTES TO LUTHEB. 281 

wants his depth of religious feeling, his firmness of purpose, 
and strength of character; others, again, want his eloquence 
or influence over his contemporaries. Luther would not 
have been Luther without these three leading features: his 
strong faith, his spiritual eloquence, and firmness of character 
and purpose. He united — and this is the most extra- 
ordinary fact connected with him — to large endowments of 
mind and heart, and the great gift of imparting these in- 
tellectual treasures, the invincible power of original and 
creative thought, both in resisting and influencing the outer 
world." 13) '^Qx did he only outrank in greatness his con- 
temporaries. "Between the first century, when Christianity 
appeared in its youth, and the sixteenth, when it obtained 
the maturity of its riper age, not one of our race has appeared 
in whom the ever creative spirit of God, the spirit of light 
and of law, has found nobler endowment, or wrought with 
richer sequence." l^) Ranked by many as the greatest man 
in history after the Apostle Paul, regarded as the man "who 
accomplished more for his race than any man in history after 
the incomparable St. Paul," ^^) eminently endowed by the 
God he served so faithfully and so well, he indeed stands 
before the world, as Melanchthon called him, "a miracle 
among men." Filled with admiration for him, the brilliant 
Carlyle, in seeking to extol his greatness, eloquently said: 
"I will call this Luther a true great man; great in intellect, 
in courage, affection, and integrity; one of the most lovable 
and precious men. Great, not as a hewn obelisk, but as an 
Alpine mountain, — so simple, honest, spontaneous, not set- 
ting up to be great at all; there for quite another purpose 
than being great. Ah yes, unsubdued granite, piercing far 
and wide into the heavens ; yet in the clefts of its fountains, 
green, beautiful valleys with flowers ! A right spiritual hero 
and prophet; once more, a true son of Nature and Fact, for 



13) Grelzer, in the pictured Life of Luther by Konig and 

Gelzer. 

14) Stang, in closing his biography of Luther. 

15) Schaff. 



282 TRIBUTES TO HJTHEB. ' 

whom these centuries, and many that are to come yet, will 
be thankful to heaven." l'») Then 

... let the pope and priest their victor scorn, 
Each fault reveal, each imperfection scan, 
And by their fell anatomy of hate 
His life dissect with satire's keenest edge, — 
But still may Luther, with his mighty heart, 
Defy their malice. . . . 

. . . Far beyond them soars the soul 
They slander; from his tomh there still comes forth 
A magic which ai)pals them by its power; 
And tlie brave monk wlio made tlie popedom rock 
Champions a world to show his e(|ual yet. 1") 

More than two hundred biographies have been written of him 
in Latin, German, French, English, Danish, Swedish, Italian, 
Spanish, Russian, Polish, and Lithuanian.l^) "A glance at 
the catalog of almost any great library, that of the British 
Museum for instance, will show that more has been written 
about Luther than about any man, save one, who ever 
lived." 1^0 

The Reformation of the Church, under God, was the 
work of Martin Luther, "whom God made choice of before 
others to be of highest eminence and power in reforming the 
Church," 20) and "never scarcely did the hand of God form 
a fitter instrument to do a greater work." 21) "The Refor- 
mation sprang living from his own heart, where God Himself 
had placed it." 22) "In the providence of God all the prin- 
ciples of reform were condensed and capitalized in the 
person of Luther, and then flamed forth upon Europe." 23) 



16) Heroes and Hero Worship, p. 127. 

17) Montgomery's Luther. 

18) Boehmer, Luther in the Light of Recent Research, p. 7. 

19) Dr. Preserved Smith. 20) John Milton. 

21) F. A. Cox, D. D., LL. D. (London), in The Life of Philip 
Melanchthon. 

22) D'Aubigne's Voice of the Church. 

23) Dr. Newell Dwight Hillis, in All the Year Round. 



TRIBUTES TO LUTHER. 283 

"A sense of duty, acting on an unconquered heart, sent him 
forth single-handed to encounter hosts of obdurate foes; 
and, by the bent of his uplifted arm, he shook the authority 
of the high pontificate which kept the potentates of the 
earth in thraldom, and brought down the peering altitude 
of that olden tyranny whose head was raised to heaven, and 
whose base was fixed in the deepest prejudice. His lone heart 
nourished the germ of the greatest revolution that world 
ever saw. Many heads caught his enthusiastic ardor; and 
his voice was echoed from the most distant comers of Europe. 
He entered the field as a champion of the rights of humanity, 
his might overcame every difficulty, and he stood forward as 
the victorious conqueror of ignorance and imposture. . . . 
Luther did more for the success of a mighty cause than any 
had before achieved in the history of the world. From his 
deep, silent, and meditative spirit an impulse was given to 
the mechanism of human society which it never till then 
received." 24) "The words of Luther set the world ablaze 
with a new era." 25) The opinions propagated by him "led 
to that happy reformation in religion which rescued one 
part of Europe from the papal yoke, mitigated its rigor in 
another, and produced a revolution in the sentiments of 
mankind greater, as well as the most beneficial, than has 
happened since the publication of Christianity." 26) "Luther's 
teaching of justification by faith," which was the central 
doctrine of the Reformation, "changed the face of the whole 
world." 27) He "freed religion, and by that he freed all ( 
things." 28) "There is no province of human intelligence 
and action which was not refreshed and fertilized by the 
universal effort," Luther's Reformation,29) so that "all human 
progress must remember Martin Luther." ^) "The Ref orma- 



24) Dr. Chalmers, in a sermon preached in London. 

26) Prof. Chas. Briggs, Union Seminary. 

26) Robertson's Charles V. 

27) Berger, Kulturaufgaben der Reformation, 

28) Adolph Hamack. 

29) Taine, English Literature, Bk. II, chap. 1. 

30) Phillips Brooks. 



284 TBIBUTES TO LUTHEB. 

tion . . . exercised its beneficial influence not only throughout 
Germany, but over the whole civilized world, and it is in 
this sense that the Reformation is universally considered 
as the beginning of a New Era in the history of the world. 
The Reformation is the source, directly or indirectly, by 
action or by reaction, of everything great and noble which 
has taken place from about the beginning of the sixteenth 
century. Through the Reformation alone men of all creeds 
have become free and enlightened. And this is the reason 
why not only the theologian, but also the political and literary 
historian hails the work of the Reformation as one of the 
greatest blessings ever bestowed on mankind." 31) All this 
is owing, as it has been said, "to the intense personal 
conviction and contagious faith of one man — Martin 
Luther." 32) Indeed, "the Reformation is Luther," 33) and 
"after Luther nothing new was added to the Reformation." 3*) 
"Christendom is Luther's monument, for Christendom is 
now predominantly Protestant. It has accepted his inter- 
pretation of Christianity. He was greater than poets or 
emperors, as religion is higher than literature or government. 
His monument ... it is all about us ; it is in us." 35) 

Now, "the principles of the Reformation for which Luther 
lived and was ready to die at any moment are the propelling 
forces of modern church history" and, it may be added, of 
modem political history as well. "They have stood the test 
of more than three hundred years, against persecution from 
without and corruption from within, and are still as vital 
as ever." 36) The principles for which the great Reformer 
contended so courageously, so valiantly, and victoriously were 
these: the supremacy of the Bible, the supremacy of faith, 
the supremacy of the people; also designated, respectively, 
as the formal, the material, and the social principles of 
Protestantism, 



31) Dr. Buchheim, professor in King's College, London. 

32) The Very Rev. Principal John Tullock, Nineteenth Cen- 
tury, April, 1884, p. 660. 

33) Mr. Morley. 34) J. A. Bengel. 
36) New York Independent. 36) Philip Schaff. 



TRIBUTES TO LUTHEB. 285 

The first of these principles accepts the canonical Scrip- 
tures of the Old and New Testaments as the only infallible 
source and rule of Christian faith and duty. "It stands 
opposed, on the one hand, to the principle of traditionalism, 
which so overloads the Word of God with human traditions 
as to hide it from the people and to make it of none effect"; 
on the other, to the principle of rationalism, which subjects 
the statements of the inerrant Word of the Infinite to the 
erring judgment of man's finite reason. With Luther the 
supremacy of the Bible was fundamental. Not the pope, not 
the fathers, not the church councils, but "the Bible was to 
him the sole infallible authority, where every Christian for 
himself could find the truth and the road to salvation, if 
he faithfully and piously looked for it." 37) ^jg constant 
appeal in his gigantic struggle with the forces of error and 
falsehood was to the Word, and to the Word alone. "He 
followed the prophets and apostles in preference to the 
fathers and the schoolmen. When Jesus Christ became his 
master, he rejected the pope. He discarded the manifold 
sense, because he had found the divine sense. He rejected 
the decisions of the coimcils because he bowed before the 
decisions of God. He went back of the fathers to the Father 
of all fathers." 38) And thus, "with the Bible in his hand, 
head, and heart, he went forth to fight his battles against the 
pope and the devil, being assured that 'one little word' of 
the Almighty can slay them. On this immovable rock . . . 
the humble monk took his stand at the Diet of Worms, units 
versus mundum, strong in the sense of his own weakness, 
independent in the sense of his dependence, free in his 
obediece to God and the voice of conscience," 39) and, standing 
on the Word of God, on that occasion which has been called 
"the greatest scene in modern European history, the point, 
indeed, from which the whole subsequent history of civiliza- 
tion takes its rise," he made that "good confession," "sur- 



37) James Anthony Froude. 

38) Prof. Chas. A. Briggs, in Luther as Professor of Theology. 

39) Philip Schaff, in Luther as a Reformer. 



286 TRIBUTES TO LUTHEB. 

passed in moral g:randeur but by one in the whole history 
of the race." God was his trust, His Word, his stay. And 
that every man might thus, as he, base his faith on the Word 
of God, and that alone, he placed the Bible into the hands 
of the people in a translation which, "one of the most 
Ilerculanean achievements of the great Reformer," ^) on 
account of its fidelity to the original, its felicity of words, 
the dignity, force, and vivacity of expression, and the 
rhythmic melody of its style, has "excited an admiration 
to which witness has been borne from the beginning by 
friend and foe." "The remarkable version of Holy Scrip- 
tures made by Luther has superseded all others in the German 
language, and is the universal, standard German Bible. It 
is acknowledged everywhere, by all parties, as one of the 
very best translations ever made; and it led the way for, 
and exerted a marked influence on, all the translations of 
the Word of God in other modern tongues. Heine says it 
created the German language. . . . Hedge, in his Prose 
Writers of Oermany, says: *The modern high German must 
be considered as having first attained its full development 
and perfect finish in Luther's version of the Bible.' By 
means of that Book it obtained a currency which nothing 
else could have given it. It became fixed. It became uni- 
versal. It became the organ of a literature, which, more 
than any other since the Greek, has become a literature of 
ideas. It became the vehicle of modern philosophy, the 
cradle of those thoughts which, at this moment, act most 
intensely on the human mind." ^^) "All true philologists 
regard this as the standard and model of classical expression 
in the German language. ... It is worthy of notice that 
in no other moderA language have so many Biblical words 
and phrases come into the use of common life as in ours." 42) 
And another Roman Catholic author said that "Luther's 



40) Seiss, in Ecclesia Lutherana, p. 73. 

41 ) Seiss, in Ecclesia Lutherana, p. 74. 

42) Frederick von Schlegel, in Lectures on the History of 
Literature ; New York, pp. 348 — 350. 



TRIBUTES TO LUTHEB. 287 

translation of the Bible is a noble monument of literature, 
a vast enterprise, which seemed to require more than the 
life of man, but which Luther accomplished in a few 
years. . . . His translation sometimes renders the primitive 
phrase with touching simplicity, invests itself with sublimity 
and magnificence, and receives all the modifications which 
he wishes to impart to it. . . . Both Catholics and Prot- 
estants regarded it an honor done to their ancient idiom." '^) 

Let grateful reverence long that work admire 

O'er which a seraph's wings might shake with joy, 

By Luther, with colossal power, achieved. 

There was the Word Almighty, from the grave 

Of buried language, into brpathing life 

Summoned in saintly glory to arise, 

And speak to souls what souls could understand. 

The words of truth 
Eternal gave their hoary secrets up, 
While God's owti language into Luther's passed, 

. . . till, behold, the voice 
Of Jesus out of classic fetters came, 
And, like its Author, to the poor man preached. 44) 

The second of the great principles of the Reformation 
was the supremacy of faith, i. e,, the Scriptural doctrine of 
justification by faith in distinction from Rome's doctrine 
of justification by works. Around this doctrine especially 
the great conflict with Rome revolved. ^ "If the Word of 
God, as the sole fountain of authority for the Christian 
conscience, as over against the authority of popes and 
councils, was the chief means of the Reformation, the 
doctrine of that Word most potent in the movement was 
justification by faith." "The underlying principle of those 
propositions (which Luther nailed to the doors of the Castle 
Church) was grace, a divine grace to save the world, the 
principle of Paul and St. Augustine; therefore not new, 
but forgotten ; a mighty comfort to miserable people, mocked 



43) Audin's Life of Luther, chap. XXIV. 

44) Montgomery's Luther, p. 173. 



288 TBIBUTE8 TO LUTHER. 

and cheated and robbed by a venal and gluttonous clergy." ^) 
"Deeply had this doctrine been written on Luther^s heart. 
Like a charm it stole upon his agitated and agonized con- 
science in the cloister of Erfurt. Like a voice from heaven 
it flashed upon him while attempting, by way of i)enance, 
to climb U{>on his knees up Pilate's staircase at Kome, and 
flUed his soul, as it has the soul of many a sinner, with 
the glad consciousness of acceptance in Jesus. ... Li all 
his subsequent labors for God and the Church Luther never 
ceased to proclaim this doctrine, as the vital essence and 
sum of the Reformation he preached, yea, as the article by 
which the Church must stand or fall. . . . Indeed, like Paul, 
he seemed to know nothing but justification by faith in 
the Son of God, crucified for sin. It was wrought in Him. 
It permeated his whole being. It was welded to his spirit. 
It was the center to which all his thoughts, feelings, and 
hopes gravitated. It was the spring from which all his 
heroic impulses came. It was the secret of his strength, both 
before God and man. As soon might immortal mind be 
annihilated as the great truth displaced from his inmost 
soul. . . . *This one article,' says Luther, 'reigneth in my 
heart,' and this one article reigns through all the work that 
he accomplished, and through all the Church which he 
restored." 4^) "No marvel," says Cardinal Newman, "that 
he has given us the clearest, fullest, joyfulest exposition of 
saving faith extant in Christian literature." "No one since 
the time of the apostles has ever taught more clearly and 
faithfully the article of justification." ^'^) "He was appointed 
in the counsels of Providence, by no means exclusive of 
the other reformers, but in a manner more extraordinary and 
much superior, to teach mankind, after upwards of a thousand 
years' obscurity, this great evangelical tenet, compared with 
which how little appear all other objects of controversy! 
He proved by numberless arguments from the Scriptures, 



45) John Lord, in Beacon Lights of History. 

46) Seiss, in Ecclesia Lutherana, pp. 62 — 66. 

47 ) Bucer. 



TRIBUTES TO LUTHEB. 289 

atid particularly by the marked opposition between law and 
faith, law and grace, that in justification before God all 
sorts of human works are excluded, moral as well as cere- 
monial. He restored to the Christian world the true forensic 
or judicial sense of the word justification, and rescued that 
term from the erroneous sense in which, for many ages, it 
had been misunderstood, as though it meant infused habits 
of virtue, whence it had been usual to confound justification 
with sanctification. By this doctrine, rightly stated, with 
all its adjuncts and dependencies, a new light breaks in on 
the mind, and Christianity appears singularly distinct, not 
only from Romanism, but also from all other religions. 
Neither the superstitions of the papist, nor the sensibility 
of the humane, nor the splendid alms of the ostentatious, nor 
the most powerful efforts of unassisted nature, avail in the 
smallest degree to the purchase of pardon and peace. The 
glory of this purchase belongs to Christ alone; and he who 
in real humility approves of, acquiesces in, and rests on. 
Him is the true Christian."^) 

'Twas* grace in principle which Luther taught: 
Here is the lever which the world uplifts, — 
"A Savior just for man unjust has died!" 
Here is a truth, whose trumpet voice might preach 
The pope's religion into airy naught; 
A truth which is at once the text of texts, 
Making all Scriptures music to our souls. 49) 

The third great principle of the Reformation, the logical 
consequence of the other two, was the supremacy of the 
people, i. e., "the general priesthood of believers in opposition 
to an exclusive hierarchy or priest-caste, which claims to 
be the indispensable mediator between God and man; thus 
setting aside the eternal priesthood of Christ, and assigning 
to the laity the degrading position of passive obedience. . . . 
This principle implies the right and duty of every believer 
to read the Word of God in his vernacular tongue, to go 



48) Scott, in his Luther a/nd the Lutheran Reformation. 

49) Montgomery's Luther. 

Four Hundred Years. 19 



290 TBIBUTES TO LUTHER. 

directly to the throne of grace, and to take an active part 
in all the affairs of the Church according to his peculiar 
gift and calling. . . . The principle of the general priest- 
hood of the Christian people is the true source of religious 
and civil freedom" ; ^) for "liberty of conscience, once se- 
cured, secures all the rest." ^4 "The principle of justification 
by faith alone brought with it the freedom of individual 
thought and conscience against authority," ^2) and, no less 
than our religious liberty, our "civil liberty is the result 
of the open Bible which Luther gave us." ^) "The principles 
of liberty of conscience and of universal priesthood, which 
make men inwardly free, lead also involuntarily to outward 
liberty."^) Therefore, "it is not incorrect to say," says 
Michelet, one of the greatest French Catholic writers of 
recent times, in the Introduction to his Life of Luther, "that 
Luther has been the restorer of liberty in modern times. 
If he did not create, he at least courageously affixed his 
signature to, that great resolution which rendered the right 
of examination lawful in Europe. And if we exercise, in 
all its plentitude at this day, this first and highest privilege 
of human intelligence, it is to him we are most indebted 
for it ; nor can we think, speak, or write without being more 
conscious at every step of the immense benefit of this intel- 
lectual enfranchisement. To whom do I owe the power of 
publishing what I am now writing but to this liberator of 
modern thought?" "The real author of modem liberty of 
thought and action," 55) "Luther is the father of modem civil- 
ization. He emancipated the human mind from ecclesiastical 
slavery. He proclaimed that freedom of thought without 
which it is easy to see that, despite the great modem inven- 
tions, the spirit of the Dark Ages must have been indefinitely 
prolonged, and the course of modern civilization must have 



50) Dr. Philip Schaff. 

51) Lord Acton, Roman Catholic. 

52) Bancroft, I, p. 178. 53) Henry Ward Beecher. 

54) Geffcken, Church and State. • 

55) James Freeman Clark. 



TBIBUTES TO LUTHEB. 291 

been essentially different." ^) "Had there been no Luther, the 
English, American, and German peoples woiild be acting 
differently, would be altogether different men and women 
from what they are at this moment." ^7) "He moved Europe 
by ideas which emancipated the millions, and set in motion 
a progress which is the glory of our age," ^) and he is, there- 
fore, "the author of the civil liberty that is enjoyed to- 
day."^) "The establishment of the Republic of America 
is a corollary of the Reformation," ^) and, therefore, back of 
all Pilgrim Fathers, our pioneer settlers, our heroes and 
martyrs, statesmen and reformers, stands the broad figure of 
the man of Erfurt and Wittenberg, Worms and Speyer." ^l) 
"The inalienable rights of an American citizen are nothing 
but the Protestant idea of the general priesthood of all 
believers applied to the civil sphere, or developed into the 
corresponding idea of the general kingship of free men." ^^) 
"No country has more reason than this Republic to recall 
with joy the blessings Luther assisted to secure for the world, 
in emancipating thought and conscience, and impressing 
the stamp of Christianity upon modem civilization." ^) The 
Protestants of the United States may well believe that 
without the Reformation they would have been rather like 
South Americans before the revolutions, than what they now 
are, the wonder, the admiration, and the example of the 
world." ^) "The free millions of the United States may, 
therefore, well rise up and do him honor, by cherishing 



56) Geo. W. Curtis. 

67 ) James Anthony Froude, Luther, a Short Biography, p. 4. 

68) John Lord's Beacon Lights, Loyola, p. 305. 

69) Associate Justice Strong. 

60) Charles Francois Dominique de Villers, Professor of Phi- 
losophy, University of Goettingen. 

61) Christia/n Intelligencer. 

62) Philip Schaff, Creeds, p. 219. 

63) The Hon. John Jay at the Luther Celebration, Academy 
of Music, New York, November 13, 1883. 

64) Thomes Smith Grimke. 



292 TRIBUTES TO LUTHEB. 

his example, pondering his history, and maintaining his 
creed." *^) 

"The greatness of some men only makes us feel that, 
though they did well, others in their places might have done 
just as they did. Luther had that exceptional greatness 
which convinces the world that he alone could have done 
the work. He was not a mere mountaintop, catching a little 
earlier the beams which, by their own course, would soon have 
found the valleys ; but rather, by the divine ordination under 
which he rose, like the sun itself, without which the light 
on mountain and valley would have been but a starlight or 
a moonlight. He was not a secondary orb, reflecting the 
light of another orb, as was ^Melanchthon and even Calvin; 
still less the moon of a planet, as Bucer or Brentius; but 
the center of undulations which filled a system with glory. 
Yet, though he rose wondrously to a divine ideal, he did not 
cease to be a man of men. He won the trophies of power 
and the garlands of affection. Potentates feared him, and 
little cliildren played with him. He has monuments in 
marble and bronze, medals in silver and gold ; but his noblest 
monument is the best love of the best hearts, and the 
brightest, purest impression of his image has been left in 
the souls of regenerated nations. He was the best teacher of 
freedom and loyalty. He has made the righteous throne 
stronger and the innocent cottage happier. He knew how 
to laugh and how to weep; therefore, millions laughed with 
him, and millions wept for him. He was tried by deep 
sorrow and brilliant fortune; he begged the poor scholar's 
bread, and from emperor and estates of the realm received 
an embassy, with a prince at his head, to ask him to untie 
the knot which defied the power of the soldier and the 
sagacity of the statesman ; it was he who added to the Litany 
the words: *In all time of our tribulation, in all time of 
our prosperity, help us, good Lord'; but whether lured by 
the subtlest flattery or assailed by the powers of hell, tempted 



65) Bishop Thorold of Rochester, England, in Philadelphia 
Press of November 10, 1883. 



TBIBUTE8 TO LUTHEB. 293 

with the miter, or threatened with the stake, he came off 
more than conqueror in all. He made a wor^ rich forever - 
more, and, stripping himself in perpetual charities, died in 
poverty. He knew how to command, for he had learned how 
to obey. Had he been less courageous, he would have at-» 
tempted nothing; had he been less cautious, he would have 
ruined all: the torrent was resistless, but the banks were 
deep. He tore up the mightiest evils by the root, but shielded 
with his own life the tenderest bud of good; he combined 
the aggressiveness of a just radicalism with the moral re- 
sistance — which seemed to the fanatic the passive weak- 
ness — of a true conservatism. Faith-inspired, he was faith- 
inspiring. Great in act as he was, great in thought, proving 
himself fire with fire, inferior eyes grew great by his ex- 
ample, and put on the dauntless spirit of resolution.' The 
world knows his faults. He could not hide what he was. 
His transparent candor gave his enemies the material of 
their misrepresentation; but they cannot blame his infirmi- 
ties without bearing witness to the nobleness which made 
him careless of the appearances in a world of def amers. For 
himself he had as little of the virtue of caution as he had, 
toward others, of the vice of dissimulation. Living under 
thousands of jealous and hating eyes, in the broadest light 
of day, the testimony of his enemies but fixes the result: 
that his faults were those of a nature of the most consummate 
grandeur and fulness, faults more precious than the virtues 
of the common great. Four potentates ruled the mind of 
Europe in the Reformation, the Emperor, Erasmus, the 
Pope, and Luther. The Pope wanes, Erasmus is little, the 
Emperor is nothing, but Luther abides as a power for all 
time. His image casts itself upon the current of all ages, 
as the mountain mirrors itself in the river that winds at 
its foot, — the mighty fixing itself immutably upon the 
changing." ^ 



Ofi) Krauth, Conservative Reformation, pp. 86. 87. 



294 LUTHER AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. 

Luther and the Constitution of the 
* United States. 

Prof. Geo. A. Romoser, Concordia College, Bronxville, N. Y. 

"We, the people of the United States, in order to form 
a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic 
tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the 
general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to our- 
selves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Consti- 
tution of the United States of America." The noble words 
of this Preamble sound the keynote of the Constitution of 

# 

the United States. The peoples who live under the egis of 
this instrument of government are to be secured in the 
undisturbed possession of certain "inalienable rights," among 
which are "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." And 
by no means the least precious of these prerogatives of citizen- 
ship under this fundamental law of government is liberty 
of conscience and freedom of worship. 

Awed at the success attained and at the responsibility 
involved, the first President of our country said in his in- 
augural speech to Congress in 1789 : "It would be peculiarly 
improper to omit, in this first oflicial act, my fervent sup- 
plications to that Almighty Being who rules over the universe, 
who presides in the councils of nations, and whose provi- 
dential .aids can supply every human defect, that His bene- 
diction may consecrate to the liberties and happiness of the 
people of the United States a government instituted by 
themselves for these essential purposes, and may enable every 
instrument employed in its administration to execute, with 
success, the functions allotted to his charge. In tendering 
this homage to the Great Author of every public and private 
good, I assure myself that it expresses your sentiments not 
less than my own, nor those of my fellow-citizens at large 
less than either. No people can be bound to acknowledge 
and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of 
men more than the people of the United States. Every step 
by which they have advanced to the character of an in- 



LUTHER AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. 295 

dependent nation seems to have been distinguished by some 
token of providential agency." It may well be that George 
Washington spoke far more wisely than he knew. The full 
truth is, that God's providence in the Reformation of the 
sixteenth century set forth the principles of liberty the 
fruition of which men are enjoying to-day under the Con- 
stitution of the United States. Charles Dudley Warner is 
right when he says that the United States are to-day what 
they are largely because of the life of Martin Luther. 

Before the sixteenth century the two great obstacles 
that lay in the way of political and civil liberty were a wrong 
view concerning the State and its functions and the arrogant ' 
pretensions of the pope. According to the prevailing view 
of government, the individual citizen counted little or 
nothing, while all emphasis was laid on the power and pre- 
rogatives of the State. Whatever attempts were made during 
the Middle Ages to change the conditions that were fostered 
by this idea of government, failed to reach the root of the 
evil and to eliminate the pernicious idea, from the practical 
affairs of government, that the State was not for the people, 
but the people for the State. There was needed a reforma- 
tion, or rather, a revolution, by which the mind of the common 
man would be freed from the obsession of prevailing con- 
ditions, and imbued with the worth and dignity and responsi- 
bility of the individual. Not until this soil and environment 
had been created could the seed of true liberty take root, and 
blossom forth into a tree of precious fruitage. 

As for the proud pretensions of papal power during the 
time of its supremacy, why clutter these pages with the debris 
of the exploded* claims put forth by him who, in a long line 
of individuals, vaunted himself as the successor of Peter, the 
Apostle of Jesus, and as the custodian of the two swords of 
secular and spiritual power? As late as 1516, in the year 
before Luther nailed the Ninety-five Theses on the door of 
the Wittenberg Castle Church, Pope Leo X reasserted the 
claim to universal sovereignty in the bull Pastor Aetemus. 
His predecessors, of whatever name, whether Alexander or 
Boniface or Gregory, could claim no more, and certainly did 



296 LUTHEB AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. 

claim nothing less than absolute supremacy in matters of 
Church and in matters of State. 

Thus the shackles were doubly riveted, and the power by 
which men's minds were held in the spiritual bondage of 
dependence on the word of teaching and on the prerogative 
of forgiveness entrusted alone to the reputed Vicar of Christ, 
was energized by the power to inflict, on king and subject 
alike, the pains and penalties of bodily torment. No prince 
was too exalted on his throne, no peasant was too lowly in 
the obscurity of his hovel to feel the vengeance of the Church 
that wielded the naked sword of power over the governments 
and lives of men. In this atmosphere of tyranny and stag- 
nation the tree of liberty could not thrive; and the tender 
shoots that it did, at times, put forth were soon blasted by 
the fiery breath of anathema and persecution. The Truth 
was not without its witnesses also in those days; but the 
voice of him crying in the wilderness could not prevail 
against the hurricane of wrath that burst on the devoted 
head of any one who dared to protest against the tyranny 
that dominated the lives of men. In the unchanged course 
of events the dream of liberty could never have been realized 
as it has been realized in the Constitution of the United 
States. But the course of events was changed, and the 
mightiest factor, under the Providence of God, in breaking 
the power of absolutism and tyranny, was the monk and 
Doctor of Divinity, Martin Luther. 

Luther was, in the full sense of the word, a reformer in 
the domain of religion. He protested against the false 
doctrine and pagan practises that had been foisted on the 
Church. He appealed from pope and from councils and 
from tradition to the written Word of the living God. He 
was intent on driving the money-changers from the Temple, 
and on purging the altar of strange fires, in order that there 
might be a place for the pure preaching of the Word of God 
and for the administration of the uncorrupted Sacraments. 
The Bible must be placed into the hands of the common 
man. It must be translated into the language that the 
people could understand, so that each one might read and 



LUTHER AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. 297 

search and determine for himself what is the will of God. 
• Therefore, he must learn to read and to think, and to pass 
judgment for himself. No longer dare he content himself 
with taking his doctrine and beliefs ready-made from the 
hand of the priest; he must give answer, and he must know 
from the authority of the inspired Record of Revelation 
what is error and what is truth. The responsibility for what 
man believed and what he did became personal. The common 
man was no longer merely one of a multitude, a pawn on 
the chess-board of life. There was awakened in him the 
consciousness of responsibility and of privilege; and with 
it all came the yearning for the liberty that goes with 
responsibility. The effects were inevitable, and made them- 
selves felt in the sphere of the State and of secular life. 

Says a recent writer on this subject. Dr. George M. 
Stephenson: "Martin Luther planted himself squarely upon 
the platform upon which Christians in all ages have stood — 
the Bible. The Bible is the book of humanity, and because 
the Bible is the book of humanity, it is the book of democracy. 
It follows from this that the Bible is the charter of liberty — 
the Magna Charta of the world. Wherever the Bible is 
an open book, there we find religious and political liberty in 
greater" or less degree. The apostles of liberty in all lands 
have recognized that the Bible is the most effective of all 
instruments to batter down the fortresses of ignorance and 
despotism. Recognizing this only too well, the commanders 
of the forces of despotism have sought to keep it out of the 
hands of the people." 

In his "Appeal to the German Nobility" Luther found 
it necessary to make known, somewhat in detail, his teaching 
on the State and on temporal power. Emphatically does 
he insist that there is a responsibility both of rulers and of 
citizens; that civil liberty is a right; that civil government 
is to be viewed as a trust to be executed in the best interests 
of the governed, and that liberty of conscience, freedom of 
speech, and the privilege of the press are rights of every 
individual. The frequently recurring statements concerning 
the divine origin of the State have been misunderstood by 



298 LUTHER AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. 

many writers to have reference to the origin of particular 
states, particular forms of government, or particular rulers. 
However, the truth is that Luther does not designate any 
particular form of civil government as being of divine origin. 

In the matter of religious liberty the statements of the 
Reformer are so clear and strong that only perverseness can 
misunderstand. At a time when the fate of IIus was not 
yet forgotten, and when men still remembered how an 
emperor had broken his solemn pledge of honor in order 
to surrender a heretic to the demands of Rome, Luther stood 
forth and proclaimed in clarion tones that force must not 
be used in matters of faith and religion, and that Church 
and State must remain separate and distinct. In the espousal 
of these principles Luther did not waver. Whatever seeming 
modification in practise there may have been is to be 
explained merely as a makeshift, made necessary, as he 
thought, by the exigencies of the times. But the basic 
principle of the sej)aration of Church and State is expressed 
too clearly and vehemently in all his writings to allow of 
any doubt concerning this fundamental doctrine. 

Reviewing Luther's teaching on religious liberty, the 
English statesman and historian James Bryce writes in his 
Holy Roman Empire: "The Reformation became a revolt 
against the principle of authority in all its forms ; it erected 
the standard of civil as well as of religious liberty, since 
both of them are needed in a different measure for the de- 
velopment of the individual spirit. . . . The empire had 
never been conspicuously the antagonist of popular freedom^ 
and was, even under Charles the Fifth, far less formidable 
to the commonalty than were the territorial princes of 
Germany. But submission, and submission on the ground 
of indefensible transmitted right, upon the ground of 
Catholic traditions and the duty of the Christian magistrate 
to suffer heresy and schism as little as the parallel sins of 
treason and rebellion, had been its constant claim and watch- 
word. Since the days of Julius Ceasar it has passed through 
many phases, and in so far as it was a Germanic monarchy, 
it had recognized the rights of the vassals, and had admitted 



LUTHER AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. 299 

the delegates of the cities to a place in the national as- 
sembly. But these principles of the medieval monarchy, 
half feudal, half drawn from Teutonic antiquity, principles 
themselves now decaying, had little to do with the religious 
conceptions and the Roman traditions on which the theory 
of the empire rested. . . . And h'ence the indirect tendency 
of the Reformation to narrow the province of government 
and exalt the privileges of the subject was as plainly adverse 
to what one may call the imperial idea as the Protestant 
claim of the right of private judgment was to the pretensions 
of the papacy and the priesthood. The remark must not be 
omitted in passing how much less than might have been 
expected the religious movement did at first actually effect 
in the way of promoting either political progress or freedom 
of conscience. The habits of centuries were not to be un- 
learned in a few years, and it was natural that ideas strug- 
gling into existence and activity should work erringly and 
imperfectly for a time." 

A German historian, Heeren, in his Historical Treatises, 
says of the Reformation : "That by its influence on Germany, 
on the Netherlands, on England, and, for a considerable 
period, on France, it became the origin of political freedom 
in Europe, can be a matter of doubt only to those who, 
'having eyes, see not.' " And Geffcken, in Church and State, 
writes: "It remains an everlasting title to glory of the 
Reformation that political liberty first became possible 
through its principles, in a manner very different, indeed, 
from that of antiquity, when the civil importance of a small 
minority rested upon the dark background of the slavery 
of the masses. The principles of liberty of conscience and 
of universal priesthood, which make man inwardly free, 
lead also involuntarily to outward liberty. A people who 
no longer feel themselves in the position of an obedient and 
submissive laity, at the service of a privileged clergy, will 
refuse to continue any longer in a state of passive obedience 
to the government without any rights of their own." Tersely 
does the French and Roman Catholic historian Michelet 
express his opinion in his Life of Martin Luther in these 



300 LUTHEB AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. 

words : "It is not incorrect to say that Luther is the restorer 
of liberty in modem times." 

The principles of government and of liberty which the 
great Reformer promulgated so clearly have found their 
highest expression in the Constitution of the United States. 
We look in vain elsewhere for the same emphatic and clean- 
cut avowal of these principles. Certainly, the French Revolu- 
tion did not espouse these principles. The French Revolution 
was not a revolt against absolutism, nor was it a defense of 
the rights of the individual. It made merely a transfer of 
absolutism from one depository to another; and instead of 
defending the rights of the individual, it asserted the 
authority of the mass. All the power formerly possessed 
by the king was taken over by the people, undiminished in 
amount, and untempered in quality. The only substantial 
change consisted in the substitution of the absolute power 
of the people for the absolute power of the prince; and 
this power vaunted itself even in the sphere of the spiritual. 
But the Constitution of the United States stands unequiv- 
ocally against absolutism in every form, for the rights of 
the individual, and for the separation of Church and State. 

If, then, the legend on the Liberty Bell, "to proclaim 
liberty throughout the land unto all the inhabitants thereof," 
has been realized; if the two principles of liberty, the 
enfranchisement of the individual and the separation of 
Church and State, form the keystone of the Constitution 
of the United States, then we must turn to the Monk of 
Wittenberg to find the mighty agent through whom God 
brought anew these blessings of liberty to the sons of men. 
Loyal American citizens have every reason to join in a civic 
celebration of the four-hundredth anniversary of the Refor- 
mation wrought through Martin Luther. 



LUTHEBANISM AND CHRISTIANITY. 301 

Lutheranism and Christianity. 

Peof. W. H. T. Dau, Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, Mo. 

In a recent conversation the propriety of addressing Lu- 
therans as "Lutheran Christians" was touched upon. How 
would this form of address have to be understood? Does 
the term "Lutheran" qualify the term "Christian," and in 
what respect? Is "Christian" the genus and "Lutheran" 
the species? If so, what is the specific difference between 
the two? Is there anything in the faith of a Lutheran 
that is not Christian? 

Imperceptibly such questions carry one back to the very 
origin of the Reformation. They invite a scrutiny of Luther's 
aim as a Reformer. An examination of Luther's object in 
opposing Rome is the more necessary, because, as regards 
this question, whether Luther reformed the Church or formed 
a church, whether he reestablished the Creed or established 
a creed, there is no agreement — and there never will be — 
among those who hail Luther as their spiritual leader. "Even 
from the Protestant standpoint there are various, if not 
mutually contradictory, conceptions of the nature of the 
Reformation. Whilst some perceive in it merely a return 
to Biblical Christianity, to the simple and pure doctrine of 
the Gospel, divested of all which they regard as a later 
addition, as the 'ordinance of men,'^ and as a disfigurement 
of the primitive apostolic type of religion (the holders of 
this view deny that there is any such thiftg as historical 
development, or a further unfolding of what has once been 
positively given), others behold in the Reformation of the 
sixteenth century only the first impulse to a movement which,, 
supported by the acquired privilege of free investigation, is 
pressing resistlessly forward, thrusting aside everything, of 
divine or human origin, which lays claim to authority, and, 
consequently, regarding the systems of belief drawn up by 
the Reformers as barriers to further progress, the utter 
destruction of which is reserved for modern times. Whilst 
it is the chief concern of the one class to establish the con- 
nection of the Reformation, as to its principles, with biblico- 



302 LUTUEBAXISM A>'D CHRISTIANITY. 

apostolic Christianity, — whilst they hold that the task of 
Protestantism consists in the maintenance of this very con- 
nection, the other class believe that the work of the Reforma- 
tion will be accomplished only when even this connection 
shall be dissolved, — when mankind, in its onward march, 
shall be conducted beyond the standpoint of that faith which 
the Reformers held fast as something that had not yet been 
superseded, and for which, as every page of their history 
shows, they were ready to forfeit their possessions and their 
lives. . In a word, these two tendencies bear toward each 
other the relation of affirmation and negation: the repre- 
sentatives of the one tendency behold in the Reformation 
the restoration to primitive perfection of that which had 
become degenerated and distorted; the representatives of the 
other tendency hail the Reformation as the dawn of an 
entirely new period, a time which is rupturing all the bonds 
which connect it with the past, and pressing onward toward 
a goal scarcely dreamed of by the Reformers." i) This state- 
ment of the Swiss historian is not quite fair to the one side 
because of the insinuated charge of mental stagnation; but, 
aside from this, it fairly summarizes tendencies with which 
every modem reader has become familiar. We expect to see 
the contrast which Hagenbach has sketched exhibited again 
during the Quadri centenary of the Reformation. It is, 
therefore, worth while ' to ascertain how Luther himself 
viewed the relation which his reformatory work bears to 
the Church of Jesus Christ. 

Naming a church after a man smacks of sectarianism. 
^'Every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of ApoUos; 
and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? Was 
Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name 
of Paul?" (1 Cor. 1, 12. 13.) The Bible reader who re- 
members this arraignment of factionalism in the early 
Church is at once inclined to declare that a grave impro- 
priety was committed when a certain Church was named 



1) Hagenbach, History of the Reformation in Germwny <md 
Switzerland Chiefly. I, 2 f. 



LUTHER ANISM AND CHBISTIANITY. 303 

Lutheran. To such a person it must be very reassuring to 
be told that this is exactly what Luther himself thought. 

As the designation of a religious society the term "Lu- 
theran" has been traced to one of Luther's fiercest opponents, 
the Romanist Dr. Eck. He employed it when promulgating 
the bull Exsurge, Domine of June 15, 1520, by which Pope 
Leo X declared Luther excommunicated from the Church.2) 
His successor, Adrian VI, speaks of "the Lutheran sect" 
and "the Lutherans" in his instructions to the Legate Fran- 
cesco Chieregati at the Diet of Nuernberg, which met toward 
the close of the year 1522.3) 

Luther was quick to perceive the danger that must arise 
to his followers from having the movement which he had 
inaugurated stamped with his name. As he viewed it, the 
danger was twofold: on the one hand, a false foundation 
for men's faith might be created by their espousing Luther's 
teaching hecause it was Luther's, and by coercing others 
to do the same; on the other hand, men anight jeopardize 
their peace of conscience by forswearing allegiance to Luther 
in order to escape persecution, when in reality they would, 
by casting aside Luther, reject the Gospel of Jesus Christ. 
Luther set himself resolutely to combat this danger. Dis- 
quieting rumors of excesses that were being perpetrated by 
radical followers of the evangelical teaching had reached 
Luther at the Wartburg. To obtain a clear insight into the 
actual state of affairs, he made a secret visit at Wittenberg 
in the beginning of December, 1521. Returning to his exile, 
he wrote his Faithful Admonition to All Christians to Avoid 
Tumult and Rebellion. It was published January 19, 1522. 
In this treatise he says: "I must admonish some who bring 
reproach upon the holy Gospel and cause many to fall away 
from it. For there are people who, after reading a page 



2) Krauth, Conservative Reformation^ p. 117. On Eck's ac- 
tivity in publishing this vile document see Gieseler, Eccles. Hist, 
IV, 51 ff. J. A. McHugh {Cath. Encycl. 9, 458) claims that Eck 
used the term "Lutherans" even during the debate at Leipzig 
in 1519. 

3) Luther's Works, St. L. Ed. 15, 2125 ff. 



304 LLTHEBANISM A^'D CHRISTIANITY. 

or two, or hearing a sermon, proceed helter-skelter to rush 
at others, and denounce them for not being evangelical, 
although the people whom they attack are often plain, simple 
folk, who would gladly learn the truth if* some one would 
teach it them. I have not taught any one to act thus, and 
St. Paul has voiced his strong disapproval of such a pro- 
ceeding. The aim of such people is to appear as men who 
know something new, and to be regarded as good Lutherans. 
But they are recklessly misapplying the holy Gospel. By 
such doings you will never drive the Gospel into people's 
hearts; you will rather scare them away, and you will have 
a grievous thing to answer for, because you have driven them 
from the truth. Stop, you fool, listen and let me tell you: 
In the first place, I beg not to have my name mentioned, 
and to call people, not Lutheran, but Christian. What is 
Luther ? The doctrine is not mine, nor have I been crucified 
for any one. St. Paul (1 Cor, 3, 4. 5) would not suffer 
Christians to be called after Paul or Peter, but only after 
Christ. Why should I — miserable piece of corruption that 
I am — have this honor that the children of Christ should 
be called after my abominable name? No, no, my dear 
friends; let us abolish party-names, and be called Christians 
after Chrtet, whose doctrine we have. The papists deserve 
to have a party-name, for they are not content with the doc- 
trine and name of Christ; they want to be popish also. Well, 
let them be called popish, for the pope is their master. 
I am not, and I do not want to be, anybody's master. I share 
with the Church the one common doctrine of Christ, who 
alone is our Master (Matt. 23, 8)."'*) 

The letter which Luther wrote to the impetuous knight 
Ulrich von Hutten about this time has been lost. If it were 
extant, it would only corroborate the statement quoted from 
the Admonition. Luther refers to it in a letter to his friend 
Spalatin, who was still tarrying at Worms, on January 16, 
1522. "What Hutten has in mind you can see'' (from the 
enclosed writings of the knight). "I would not like to see 
men fight for the Gospel with force and bloodshed. I have 



4) St. L. Ed. 10, 370 f. 



LUTHER ANISM AND CHRISTIANITY. 306 

a|;i8wered the person (dem Menschen) accordingly. By the * 
Word the world has been overcome, the Church has been 
preserved; by the Word it will also be restored. And as 
to Antichrist, he began his rule without physical force, and 
will also be destroyed without physical force, by the Word." ^) 

Two months later (about the middle of March, 1522), 
when he had returned to Wittenberg, Luther published the 
comforting letter which he had written to one of the most 
lovable characters in the early days of the Reformation, the 
noble Hartmuth von Kronberg. With others this noble- 
man had incurred the fierce hatred of the Romanists because 
he was publicly championing Luther's cause, Luther writes 
him: "We have to thank God with our whole heart because 
He still gives evidence that He will not suffer ^is holy 
Word to be removed, for He has given to you and many 
others a love for His Word and a spirit that avoids offense. 
For this proves that these people do not believe on account 
of a man, but on account of the Word itself. Many there 
♦ are who believe on my account; but those alone are sincere 
who adhere to the Word, even though they were to be told 
that I myself had denied and fallen away from the Word — 
which God forbid ! These are -the people that remain un- 
concerned, no matter what evil, horrible, abominable things 
they hear about me or my followers. For they do not believe 
in Luther, but in Christ Himself. The Word has laid hold 
of them, and tljey have laid hold of the Word. They dis- 
regard Luther; let him be a knave or a saint, — God is 
able to speak through Balaam as well as through Isaiah, 
through Caiaphas as well as through St. Peter, yea, through 
an ass. These are my people. For I myself do not know 
Luther, and do not wish to know him. Nor do I preach 
Luther, but Christ. The devil take Luther, if he can; but 
let him leave Christ in peace; then we also shall abide." 6) 

About the middle of April, 1522, Luther published his 
treatise: Dr. Martin Luther's Opinion that the Sacrament 

• 

Should Be TaJcen in Both Forms, and Other Innovations. 



5) St. L. Ed. 15, 2506. 6) St. L. Ed. 15, 1670. 

Four Hundred Years. 20 



306 LUTHEBANISM AXD CHBI8TIANITY. 

He concludes the first part of this treatise with the words: 
"As Paul says, Gal. 1, 8: 'Though we or an angel from 
heaven preach any other gospel unto you than that which 
we have preached unto you, let him be accursed,' so say 
I, too, in the present case: In this and all other matters 
you must so firmly and surely build on the Word of God 
that you would not depart from it, even if I should turn 
fool — which God forbid ! — and should recant and deny my 
doctrine. In that event you must say: Though Luther 
himself or an angel from heaven should teach another doc- 
trine, let it be accursed. For you must not be the disciple 
of Luther, but of Christ. It is not sufficient to say : Luther, 
Peter, or Paul has said so, but you must feel Christ in your 
own heart, and you must be conscious without faltering 
that you have the Word of God, even though the whole world 
should fight against it. Until you feel thus, you surely have 
not yet tasted the Word of God. Your ears still cling to the 
mouth of a man or to his pen; you have not yet embraced 
the Word with your inmost heart, and have not grasped the 
meaning of Matt. 23, 10: 'One is your Master, even Christ.' 
The Master teaches in the hearts of His disciples, however, 
through the external word of His preachers, who convey it 
to the ear; but it is Christ who drives the Word home. 
Hence, consider that you are facing persecution and death. 
In those trials I cannot be with you nor you with me. Every 
one must fight for himself, and overcome the devil, death, 
and the world. If in that emergency you were to look about 
to see where I am, or I where you are, and were to surrender 
your faith because you were told that I or some one else 
had taught a different doctrine, you would perish; for you 
would have allowed the Word to slip out of your heart; you 
would not be found clinging to the Word, but to me or 
others. There would be no help for you." But toward the 
close of the second part he says (and this refers to the 
other danger which we noted before) : "I observe that 
a good admonition must be administered to those whom 
Satan now begins to persecute. There are some among 
them who would escape danger, when being attacked, by 



LUTHEBANISM AND CHRISTIANITY. 307 

saying, I am not siding with Luther nor with anybody, but 
with the holy Gospel, or with the Church, or with the Roman 
ChurchJ) By such tactics they secure their personal peace, 
and yet in their heart they regard my doctrine as evangelical 
and adhere to it. Verily, such a profession does not help 
them; it is the same as if they had denied Christ. Hence 
I pray these people to have a care. True, you must not, 
on your life and soul, say: I am Lutheran, or papist; for 
neither Luther nor the pope has died for you, nor is he your 
master, but Christ alone, and to Him you must profess 
allegiance. Butuf you hold that Luther's teaching is evan- 
gelical, and the pope's teaching unevangelical, you must not 
utterly cast Luther aside, or you will also cast his teaching 
aside, which you regard as the teaching of Christ. This is 
what you must say : I do not care whether Luther is a knave 
or a saint ; his teaching, however, is not his, but Christ's 
own. For you observe that the tyrants are not merely seeking 
to kill Luther, but to destroy his teaching. It is because 
of the teaching that they lay hands on you, and ask you 
whether you are Lutheran. Verily, in such a case you must 
not talk in words that sway like a reed, but must plainly 
confess Christ, no matter whether it is Luther, Claus, or 
George that has preached Him. Let go of the person, but 
confess the teaching. Thus St. Paul, too, writes to Timothy 
(2 Tim. 1, 8) : *Be not thoU ashamed of the testimony of 
our Lord nor of me, his prisoner.' If it had been sufficient 
for Timothy to confess the Gospel, Paul would not have 
commanded him not to be ashamed of him, viz,, not of Paul's 
person, but of Paul as a prisoner for the sake of the Gospel. 
If Timothy had said: I do not side with Paul nor with 
Peter, but with Christ, and had known at the same time that 
Paul and Peter were teaching Christ, he would have denied 



7) It was, no doubt, for reasons of personal advantage that 
Zwingli in Switzerland about this time manifested irritation 
when the Catholic party identified him with Luther. His state- 
ment: "Neque ego Lutheri causae hie patrocinor, sed evangelii," 
*. e.: "1 am not championing Luther's cause, but the Gospel's," 
cannot enhance the world's esteem for him. 



808 ' LUTHEBAinSM AJXD CHBIBTIANITT. 

Christ Himself. For Christ says regarding those who preach 
Him (Matt. 10, 40) : *He that receiveth you receiveth Me,' 
and (Luke 10, 16): 'He that despiseth you despiseth Me.' 
Why? Because treatment accorded Christ's messengers who 
bring to men His Word is regarded as treatment accorded 
to Christ Himself and His Word." 8) 

The friends of the Beformation at Miltenberg on the 
Main were the first to suffer violence at the hands of the 
Catholics. In 1524, Luther addressed a consolatory letter 
to them, to which he appended an exposition of the 120th 
Psalm. Li this letter he says: '^ Although I do not like 
to see the doctrine and people called Lutheran, and must 
suffer to see God's Word sullied with my name, still they 
must permit Luther, the Lutheran teaching and people, to 
remain, while they, together with their teaching, perish and 
are put to shame." ^) 

In 1528, some of Luther's friends in the dominions of 
Duke (Jeorge of Saxony, Luther's confirmed enemy, tried 
to reach an agreement regarding their religion with the 
Duke. One of the articles referred to Luther's doctrine: 
they proposed to say, that they intended to abide by the 
Gospel. Luther held that this would not suffice the Duke 
as an answer, and suggested that they might say: Inasmuch 
as the question regarding Luther's teaching referred to many 
things, they could not return a definite answer; for Luther 
was teaching many things which even Duke George approved, 
as, e. g,, his defense of the Sacrament against the enthusiasts, 
his statements about soldiers, secular government, etc. "More- 
over, Luther himself purposes not to be Lutheran, except 
as far as he purely teaches the Holy Scriptures." i®) 

A year later Luther was compelled to issue against Duke 
George his treatise Concerning Secret and Stolen Letters, 
to which he appended a brief exposition of the 7th Psalm. 
The seventh verse in this Psalm Luther makes to apply 
directly to his work as a teacher in the Church. He says: 
"Why, my hearty wish and prayer, my diligent teaching and 



8) St. L. Ed. 20, 73 f. 90 f. 9) St. L. Ed. 5, 1283. 

10) St. L. Ed. 21a, 1093. 



LUTHEBANISM AI7D GHBISTIANITY. 309 

writing, aims at nothing else than to see the poor masses 
of Thy people, who have been so miserably torn by sects 
and confused by dreams of men, scattered and straying like 
a flock of sheep, converted to Thee again, that by Thy Spirit 
they may know Thee in the true faith as their only Shepherd 
and Master and Bishop of their souls. (Ezek. 34, 23; 1 Pet. 
2, 25.) And for their sake I still pray that Thou wouldest 
exalt and preserve Thyself and Thy Word through our 
ministry, in order that they may abide with Thee in the one 
faith. For I have not sought to have them cling to me, or 
that I should rise to honor and. high station, but I have 
directed them to Thee, and made them cling to Thee, in order 
that Thou mightest be greatly exalted, and glorious and 
praiseworthy among them." H) 

On Saturday after St. John's Day, July 1, 1531, Luther 
preached on the words of Christ in John 7, 16 : "The doctrine 
is not mine," and said: "That is what I also say: The 
Gospel is not mine, thus distinguishing my teaching from 
that of all other preachers who do not hold my doctrine. 
Accordingly, I can say: This is my doctrine, — Luther's 
doctrine; and again: It is not my doctrine; it is not in 
my hand, but is the gift of God. Good Lord, I have not spun 
it out of my own head; it did not grow in my garden; it 
did not flow from my spring; it was not bom of me. It is 
God's gift, not an invention of man. Thus both statements 
are correct: The doctrine is mine, and yet, not mine. For 
it is of God, the heavenly Father, and yet it is I that preach 
and maintain this doctrine." ^2) 

In this manner Luther consistently, throughout his writ- 
ings, maintains the identity of his teaching with that of 
Christ, of the Bible, of the true apostolic Church. To be 
Lutheran a doctrine must be Christian, and anything Chris- 
tian is Lutheran. The Swedish king spoke Luther's mind 
when he said: "Let us not call our Church Lutheran, let 
us call it Christian and Apostolic." ^3) And it is well that 
attention has been called to the fact that "the Lutheran 



11) St. L. Ed. 19, 542. 12) St. L. Ed. 8, 27. 

13) Krauth, Conaerv. B&form,] p. 118. 



310 LUTHEBANI8M AND CHRISTIANITY. 

Church has never by any general official act taken the name 
Lutheran. Art, history, and popular usage have practically 
determined its title. Said the Marquis of Brandenburg when 
ridiculed as a Lutheran: *If I be asked whether with heart 
and lip I confess that faith which God has restored to us by 
Luther as His instrument, I have no scruple, nor have I a dis- 
position to shrink from the name Lutheran. Thus under- 
stood, I am, and shall to my dying hour remain, a Lutheran.' 
This is the only sense in which any Lutheran tolerates the 
name." l^) The very confessional writings of our Church 
avoid this denominational name which enemies have fastened 
upon our Church, and when the last of the creedal utterances 
of our Church, the Form of Concord, in words that vibrate 
with earnestness, waives every human authority as a deter- 
minant for men's faith, and traces Luther's teaching only 
to the i)ure fountain of Israel, the Word of God, the world 
must acknowledge that the Lutherans have done all in 
their power to clear their common denominational name 
from the charge of sectarianism. Adapting the saying of 
William Chillingworth to his own Church, the Lutheran 
truthfully asserts: "The Bible, the whole Bible, nothing but 
the Bible, is the religion of Lutheranism." For even Prot- 
estantism, in whose behalf the English confessor uttered his 
winged word, when understood in its historical and original 
meaning, is bound up in Lutheranism, and Archbishop Bram- 
hall properly reminded his countrymen — and others — that 
"the name Protestant is one to which others have no right but 
by communion with the Lutherans." i^) 

Gottcs Wort imd Luthers Lehr' 
Vergehet nun und nimmermehr — 

in this memorial verse Lutheran catechumens are taught to 
express their conviction of the identity and the permanency 
of Lutheran teaching and Bible-teaching. "Luthers Lehr'," 
not in so far as it is God's Word, but hecause it is God's 
Word, is ever-enduring. The world will ever need it, as it 



14) H. E. Jacobs, in Universal Cyclopedia, 7, 358. 

15) Conserv. Reform., p. 117. 



LUTHER ANISM AND CHRISTIANITY. 311 

needs the pure Word and the pure Gospel of the Redeemer, 
and God will permit the extinction of Lutheranism as little 
as that of His Word and Christ's evangel. The human or 
historic title may perish, — though we doubt even that, — 
but Lutheranism as a principle of religion is imperishable. 
The various essays in this book, in distinct ways and with 
different degrees of pointedness, all serve to exhibit the 
harmony of "Gottes Wort" and "Luthers Lehr' " ; but we 
would invite special attention to the discussion of the three 
great principles in .Luther's and the Bible's teaching : Sola 
Scriptura, Sola Gratia, Sola FideA^) 

Whether there is anything in a name, depends very much 
on the appropriateness of the name. As regards the name 
"Lutheran," the compelling logic, the eminent fitness of the 
name, which induced the followers of the evangelical teaching 
emanating from Wittenberg not only to bow with such grace 
as they could muster to the inevitable, to this seeming sect 
name, but to accept it with as great a joy, and cherish it 
as just as exquisite a badge of honor as the early disciples 
accepted the name Christians, — the noble record which the 
name has made for itself in four centuries, the blessed 
influences which have gone out from the Church that has 
maintained the name in its true historic and only legitimate 
meaning, — these things have been forcefully and eloquently 
set forth by two of America's Lutheran teachers, and there 
is no need of repeating their argument.!^) But we cannot 



16) See Prof. Engelder's article, p. 97. 

17) See Dr. Waltlier's series of q^rticles "On the Name Lu- 
theran," with which he started his famous periodical, Der Luthe- 
raner. Vol. 1, 2 ff. 5 ff. 9 ff., etc., also his Foreword to Vol. 6 of 
Der Lutheraner, on the charge of exclusivism raised against the 
Lutheran Church; and Dr. Krauth, in Conserv. Reform., p. 121 f., 
where he reviews, somewhat as Walther had done, various names 
which possibly might be applied to our Church, and concludes: 
"Every one of them, as the distinctive name of a communion, is 
open to the charge of claiming too much, expressing too little, 
or of thrusting an accident into the place of an essential prin- 
ciple. The necessity of distinctive names arises from the indis- 
putable divisions of Christendom, and in the posture of all the 



312 LUTHEBA2(I8M a:7D CHRISTIANITr. 

• 

forego the pleasure of noting a few of the utterances of 
Walther on the relation of Lutheranism to Christianity- 
He says: ''By professing allegiance to the Evangelical Lu- 
theran Church, we mean to profess allegiance to none other 
than the [afore-desaribed] one, holy, catholic. Christian 
Church of all times, which alone has and holds the truth, 
and comprises the sum total of all the children df CkxL" 
*'The Lutheran Church is not the visible totality of all who 
are called Lutheran, but the great, unchangeable Church, to 
which all those who are rightly called* Lutherans profess 
allegiance by their teaching. To this Church millions of 
souls have belonged before Luther's name was uttered in 
this world, and who were not called Lutheran. Accordingly, 
a particular congregation, or a national Church, in which 
Lutheran doctrine is preached and received, is only a, but 
not the, Lutheran Church; for this Church is scattered 
throughout the world." '*We extend our hand to any x>Qrson 
who without guile submits to the entire written Word of 
God, cherishes in his heart and professes before men the 



facts the name of ^Luther defines the character of a particular 
Church as no other could. It has been borne specifically by but 
one Church; and that Church, relieved as she is of all the re^ 
sponsibility of assuming it, need not be ashamed of it. No name 
of a mere man is more dear to Christendom and to hiunanity. 
It is a continual remembrancer of the living faith, the untiring 
energy, the love of Christ and of men, on the part of one who 
did such eminent service to the Church, that men cannot think 
of her without thinking of him." — Schmauck and Benze, in The 
. Confessional Principle a/nd the Confessions of the Lutheran Church, 
p. 6 : "The great error of Schaff in his Creeds of Christendom and 
of many liberal Lutherans is the assumption that Lutheranism 
is a form of Protestantism colored by the personal opinions of 
two reformers, Luther and Melanchthon. Lutheranism is the 
old faith of the Church, catholic and evangelical, protestant only 
as to Roman errors, founded on the teaching of Scripture, with- 
out the admixture of human reason. Luther and Melanchthon, 
as the authors of 'personal opinions,* have no more to do -with 
Lutheranism than the crack of the Liberty Bell has to do with 
our national liberty itself." 



LUTHEBANISM AND CHRISTIAN riY. 313 

true faith in our dear Lord Jesus Christ; we regard such 
a person $is our fellow-believer, our brother in Christ, 
a member of our Church, a Lutheran, no matter among what 
sect he may be concealed and kept a prisoner." "As long 
as there has been an orthodox Church on earth, so long 
there has been a Lutheran Church. It sounds strange, but 
it is true, the Lutheran Church is as old as the world; for 
it has no other doctrine than that which the patriarchs, 
prophets, and apostles received from God, and proclaimed. 
The name Lutheran, indeed, did not come into existence 
until -three hundred years ago, but not the matter which 
that name signifies. Accordingly, the question. Where was 
the Lutheran Church before Luther? is easily answered, 
thus: The Lutheran Church was wherever there still were 
Christians who with all their heart believed in Jesus Christ 
and His Holy Word, and would not surrender this alone- 
saving faith of theirs in favor of human ordinances, or who 
made this Church their final refuge in the hour of death." 
"Luther by no means founded a new Church, much less 
was that his intention. On the contrary, he raised his 
protest against the papists because they had in innumerable 
doctrines departed from the old, true, apostolic Church. His 
writings were nothing else than a call to Christendom not 
to forsake the old Church. . . . All doctrines which Luther, 
by his study of the Word of God, recognized as the doctrines 
of the true Church he retained, proclaimed them to the 
world, and defended them till his death." 18) 

It is possible that there will be people who manifest un- 
bounded astonishment at assertions such as these. They 
will only reveal that they have not grasped the true import 
of what happened four Tiundred years ago. They would 
assign us a seat on the sectarian bench : we decline, decidedly. 
If Luther organized a sect, we will have nothing to do with 
him; we belong to Jesus Christ. 

Ah, but then we are "the alone-saving Church," and the 
Eoman Church has revived in the Lutheran I Yes, we must 
be prepared for this shallow inference from statements which 



18) Der Lutheraner, 1, 97. 99. (Comp. 6, 18) 6. 6 f. 97. 



314 LUTHEBANISM AND CHRISTIANITY. 

assert merely the ecumenical character of Lutheran teaching, 
and merge Lutheranism utterly in Christianity, so much so, 
that we see Luther no more, but "Jesus only." 

We must be prepared likewise to meet the objection that 
the claim of scripturalness and catholicity is asserted by 
every sect. Anybody can assert. The patient expounder of 
Lutheranism will succeed in showing to the satisfaction of 
every unbiased mind that the Lutheran Reformation is 
nothing but the restoration of Christianity in its original, 
pure form. 

From this it follows that, when we speak of a mission of 
the Lutheran Church, we do not mean, and we cannot mean, 
anything else than a reassertion of Biblical teaching in all 
its i)arts. "To the Law and to the testimony!" — that is 
the slogan for this mission. There is a reason why other 
Churches i)rofessing to stand on the Protestant foundation 
are speaking of a further development of the principles of 
the Reformation: they have had bequeathed to them a task 
unfinished, or faultily executed by their founders. The 
Lutheran Church, viewing the Reformation as the movement 
by which men were brought back to the arms of Jesus, 
enfolded in the Scriptures of God, and enabled to have 
a free access by faith to the heart of the God of grace, rests 
satisfied with those achievements. Its task in the future 
can only be to ai)ply to every arising need, amid the ever- 
changing circumstances of men's earthly existence, the 
eternal truths which the angel flying through the midst of 
heaven with the everlasting Gospel proclaimed to every 
nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people. (Rev. 14, 6. 7.) 
The faithful testimony of the Lutheran Church can render 
invaluable aid to every other Church in making it see the 
deficiencies of its teaching. Oh! may this testimony be 
largely rendered, and in no spirit of haughty superiority, 
but of serving love. After writing the words above quoted 
to ITartmuth von Kronberg, Luther pleads that the poor 
Roman Catholics be kindly treated and with much for- 
bearance weaned from their shocking errors. The warning 
applies to the whole activity of the Church, and it may not 



CHBONOLOGICAL TABLE OF THE AGE OF LUTHER. 315 

be amiss that we remind ourselves during the coming days 
of the anniversary that the virulence of passion can never 
add to, but may subtract from, the majesty of simple ^ruth, 
spoken without fear or favor. As a witness for Christ and 
leading men to abide in His Word, the Lutheran* Church 
will fulfil her enlightening and liberating world-mission. 
She does not stake her success on the spread of a human 
name or on the organization of one universal, visible Church, 
but on the dissemination of the truth as it is in Christ. 
She is content if, with Luther and his early followers, men 
accept the teaching of the apostles and prophets, and give 
full recognition to the personality and work of Christ, who is 
the chief corner-stone on which men's faith must be built up. 
With malice toward none, with love toward all, with 
peace in their hearts and truth on their lips, let the sons 
and daughters of the Lutheran Church address themselves 
to the tasks of the new age. Let them reclaim from error 
those who are still fettered by it, aid all who struggle to 
assert and maintain the pure pristine teaching of God's 
people; above all, let them hold that fast which they have, 
that no man may take their crown. And let them trustfully 
confide to the God of truth, righteousness, and love the 
fortunes of their Church as they were taught to do in 
their childhood days: 

God's Word, which Martin Luther taught, 
Shall nevermore be brought to naught. 



Chronological Table of the Age of Luther* 

1439—1493 Frederick III (IV) Emperor of Germany. 

1440 ( ?) Gutenberg invents printing-press. 

1450 Vatican Library founded by Pope Nicholas V. 

1453 Mahomet II takes Constantinople. 

1455 Gutenberg prints his first Bible. 
1471—1484 Sixtus IV Pope. 

1477 First watches made at Nuernberg. 

1483 Richard of York smothers the princes; is proclaimed 
king of England. 
November 10. Martin Luther horn at Eislehen. 



316 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE OF THE AGE OF LUTHEB. 

1484 William Tyndale born. 
January 1, Ulrich Zwing^i bom. 

1484—1402 Innocent VIII Pope. 
1484—1497 Luther at ManafeU. 

1485 August 25. Saxony, by the Treaty of Leipzig, divided 

into two parts : Electoral, or Ernestine, and Ducal, 
or Albertine Saxony. 
1485 — 1500 Albert Duke of Saxony. 
1487—1525 Frederick the Wise Elector of Saxony. 
1488 Henry VII founds English navy. 
1480 John Wessel dies. 
1492—1503 Alexander VI Pope. 

1492 Ji*all of Granada; end of Moorish reign in Europe. 
October 12. Columbus discovers America. 
1494—1547 Francis I King of France. 
1494 — 1547 Henry VIII King of England; ascends throne 1609. 

1497 Melanchthon born. 

Cabot reaches coast of Newfoundland. 
1497 — 1498 Luther at the school of the Nullhrueder at Magdeburg. 

1498 Savonarola burned at the stake. 
Columbus reaches mouth of Orinoco. 
India reached by sea from Portugal. 

1498 — 1501 Luther at St, Oeorge'8 School at Eieenachy received 

by Frau Cot to. 

1499 Switzerland establishes its independence. 
1500 — 1539 George the Bearded Duke of Saxony. 

1501 Lutl^ begins studies at University of Erfurt, 

1502 Luther takes degree of Bachelor of Arts, 
Columbus surveys coast of Colombia. 
University of Wittenberg founded. 

1503—1513 Julius II Pope. 

1505 Luther takes degree of Master of Arts. 

July 12. Luther enters Augustinian monastery at 
Erfurt. 

1506 Building of St. Peter's Cathedral at Rome begun. 
Columbus dies broken-hearted. 

1507 Spring. Luther ordained priest; first mass May 2. 
1508 — 1567 Philip the Magnanimous, Landgrave of Hesse (bom 

1504; declared of age 1517). 

1508 November. Luther called to professorship at Witten- 

berg; teaches Ethics of Aristotle, 

1509 March 9. Luther take^ degree of Baccalaureus ad 

Biblia. 
July 10. Calvin born. 
1610 Autumn. Luther teaches Lombard's Sentences at 
Erfurt. 
, 1611 Summer. Luther returns to Wittenberg to lecture 
on the Bible. 
October — 1612. February. Luther's journey to Rome, 

where he spends month of December, 
Council of Pisa. 



CHBONOLOGIGAL TABLE OF THE AGE OF LUTHER. 817 

1612 October 18. Luther takes degree of Doctor of The- 

ology. ' 
Ponce de Leon in search of Fountain of Perpetual 
Youth. 
1612—1617 Fifth Lateran Council. 

1613 Vasco de Balboa discovers Pacific Ocean. 
1513—1521 Leo X Pope. (Dies December 1, 1521.) 

1514 Reuchlin's Controversy with Dominicans. 
Cortez begins conquest of Mexico. 

1515 May. Luther elected district vicar of his order, 
1616 "Epistolae Obscurorum Virorum" published. 

Erasmus publishes Greek New Testament. 
Zwingli goes to Maria-Einsiedeln. 

1517 Octo^r 31. Luther posts Ninety-Five Theses on In- 

* dulgences on Castle Church at Wittenberg, 

1518 Melanchthon becomes professor at tWittenberg. 
Luther at Heidelberg, 

October 12 — 14. Luther's interview with Cajetan at 
Augsburg, 

1519 January 1. Zwingli preaches initial sermon at Zurich. 
January 4 — 5. Luther's interview with Miltitz at 

Altenhurg. 
July 4 — 14. Luther's debate with Eck at Leipzig. 
1519 — 1555 Charles V Emperor of Germany (elected June, 1519; 

crowned October 23, 1520; retires to monastery 
of St. Just 1557). 

1520 Massacre of Stockholm instituted by Christian II, 

King of Denmark. 

June 15. Leo X signs bull "Exsurge Domine," ex- 
communicating Luther if he fails to recant within 
sixty days. 

August. Luther publishes "Address to the Christia/n- 
NobiUty of the German Nation on the Improve- 
ment of the Christian Estate." 

October. Luther publishes the treatise "On the Baby- 
lonian Captivity of the Church," 

November. Luther publishes tract "On the Freedom 
of a Christian Man." 

December 10. Luther hums the Pope's bull and the 
Canon Law. 

1521 March 16. Magellan discovers Philippine Islands. 
April 17 — 18. Luther appears before Diet at Worms^ 
(Edict of Worms signed May 26, dated May 8.) 
Mexico Oity taken by Cortez. 

May 4 — 1522, March 1. Luther's exile at the Wart- 
burg; translation of Bible begun. 

Melanchthon's "Loci" published. 

Beginning of the reformation at Riga. 
1622 March. Luther preaches eight serm>ons against the 
Zwickau prophets at Wittenberg. 

Reuchlin dies. 

Magellan completes circumnavigation of the globe. 



318 CHBOXOLOGICAL TABLE OF THE AGE OF LUTHEB. 

1622—1623 Hadrian VI Pope. 

1523 April 4 — 5. Catherine von Bora (born at Lippendorf 

January 29, 1499) leaves Nimbschen Cistercian 
Cloister, which she entered 1508, and where she 
took the veil October 8, 1515. 

May 7. Sickingen overthrown and revolt of knights 
quelled at Landstuhl. 

Thomas Muenzer at Allstaedt. . 

Spanish Inquisition begins reign of terror in Nether- 
lands; H. Voes and J. Esch first martyrs of the 
Reformation. 

Luther's controversy with Henry VIII, 
1523—1534 Clement VII Pope. 

1524 Staupitz dies. 
Karlstadt at Orlamuende. 
Erasmus attacks Luther. 

Diet of Nuernberg. Treaty of Regensburg. 

Luther publishes appeal "To the Magistrates of All 

Cities of Qermany in behalf of Christian Schools." 
Luther publishes tract "On Trade and Usury" 
1524 — 1525 May. Peasants' War; suppressed at Frankenhausen. 
Luther writes "Against the Thievish and Murderous 

Hordes of Peasants" 

1525 February 24. Charles V defeats Francis I at battle 

of Pavia. 
June 23. Luther marries Catherine von Bora. 
Anabaptist uprising in Switzerland. 
Beginning of controversy regarding Lord's Supper. 
Luther publishes treatise "On the Bondage of the 

Will" against Erasmus. 
1525 — 1532 John the Steadfast Elector of Saxony. 

1526 May 4. Formation of League of Torgau between Philip 

of Hesse and John of Saxony. 
June — July. Diet and Recess of Spires. 
Luther publishes "Oerm^an Mass." 
June 7. Hans Luther born. 

Debate at Baden between Zwinglians and Catholics. 
Tyndale publishes English New Testament. 

1527 Diets of Odense and Westeraes; Gustavus Vasa suc- 

ceeds in having Lutheranism adopted. 
May 6. Spanish army sacks Rome and imprisons 

Pope. 
July. Luther severely ill. 
(?) "Ein' feste Burg." 
December 10. Elizabeth Luther bom. 

1528 First Disputation at Berne. 
August 3. Elizabeth Luther dies. 

1529 Visitation of churches in Saaony; Luther's Cate- 

chisms. 
Diet of Spires; Recess April 12; Protest of Lutheran 

Princes April 25. 
Vienna besieged by Turks. 



CHKONOLOGICAL TABLE OF THE AGE OF LtJTHEB. 319 

May 4.' Magdalene Luther horn. 

October 2. Luther's Conference with Zwingli at Mar- 
burg. First Peace of Kappel between Zwinglians 
and Romanists. 

1530 Diet of Augsburg: arrival of Emperor June 15, pres- 

entation of Augsburg Confession June 25, Recess 
of Augsburg published in Imperial Edict Novem- 
ber 19, 

April 23 — October 4. Luther's exile at Feste Kohurg 
during Diet of Augsburg. 

May 29. Luther's father dies. 

Tyndale publishes his English Pentateuch. 

1531 Formation of Smalcald League. 
June 30. Luther's mother dies. 

October 11. Zwingli slain in battle at Kappel. 
November 9. Martin Luther, Jr., bom. 
1532 — 1547 John Frederick the Magnanimous Elector of Saxony 

(lived as Duke of Saxony till 1554). 

1532 February 4. Black Cloister at Wittenberg deeded to 

Luther. 
Diet of Ratisbon. 

Peace of Nuernberg between Catholics and Protestants. 
Henry VIII renounces allegiance to the Pope. 

1533 January 28. Paul Luther born. 
Pizarro conquers Peru. 

1534 Luther completes translation of the Bible. 
December 17. Margaret Luther born. 
Reformation of Wuerttemberg ; Duke Ulrich re- 
stored by Philip of Hesse. 

1534 — 1535 Anabaptist uprising at Muenster. 
1534—1549 Paul III Pope. 

1535 Calvin publishes his "Institutio Religionis Chris- 

tianae." 

Henry VIII has Sir Thomas More beheaded for deny- 
ing his supremacy in the spiritual affairs of his 
subjects. 

November 7. Luther confers with papal legate Ver- 
gerio at Wittenberg. 

1536 Calvin in Geneva. 
Erasmus dies. 

May 29.- Luther signs Wittenberg Concordia. 
World's first newspaper, "The Gazetta," published at 

Venice. 
Diet of Copenhagen. 
October 6. Tyndale burned at Vilvoorden. ("Lord, 

open the King of England's eyes!") 

1537 February. Luther prepares Smalcald Articles, goes 

to attend Congress at Smalcald, where he is very 
ill with the stone, and makes his first unll Feb- 
ruary 27, 
Controversy icith Antinomians. 



820 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE OF THE AGE OF LUTHEB. 

1538 League of Nuernberg formed. 
Calvin expelled from Geneva. 
1530 February — April. CJongress at Frankfort; negotia- 
tions with Emperor; Treaty of Frankfort signed 
April. 19. 
May. Luther at Leipzig; inaugurates reformation in 

Alhertine Saxony. 
Reformation introduced in Brandenburg by Joachim 11. 
Diet of Odense. 

December 10. Luther eigne "confessionetl counsel** in 
the matter of Philijf of Hesse^s second marriage, 
1539 — 1541 Henry the Pious Duke of Saxony. 

1540 January — February. Catherine Luther very ilh 
June. Religious Conference at Spires and Hagepau. 
July. Lut^r at Conference at Eisenach, 

Society of Jesus ("Jesuits") formed. 

1541 January. Religious conference at Worms. 
Karlstadt dies. 

Regensburg Interim. 
Calvin returns to Geneva. 

1541 April— July. Diet and religious conference at Ratis- 

bon. 
Reformation at Halle begun. 

Fernando de Soto discovers the Mississippi River. 
1541 — 1546 Maurice Duke of Saxony (becomes Elector of Saxony 

1546, dies 1553). 

1542 January 6. Luther makes his second voilU 

War of Smalcald League with Duke Henry of Bruns- 
wicki who is expelled and his country opened to 
the Reformation. 

Beginning of Roman Inquisition; Francis Xavier in 
India. 

September 20. Magdalene Luther dies. 

1543 Diet of Nuernberg. 

1544 Diet of Spires. 
Peace of Crespy. 

1545—1547 (1563) Council of Trent. 

1545 Diet of Worms. 

1546 February 18. Luther dies at Eislehen; buried at the 

foot of his pulpit in the ScMosskirche at Witten- 
berg, February 22. 

Religious Conference at Regensburg. 

Diet of Ratisbon. 

Beginning of Smalcaldic War. 

1547 April 24. Defeated in battle at Muehlberg, Elector 

John Frederick loses his electorate and half of his 
• country. 

1552 December 20. Catherine Luther dies. 



» «•» » 



•n- 



1 






-T" 






rr- 






fJ. 



\-5- 



"•N 



«i^ ■ :: 






™"- ~* 



■> ' 



.~.'^ <:s'. T~. 









€;■ 



:■ ,■? 



® 






^ 









• '-'V 








2- .'---v-.l 




;:-^© 




.-v^ ^^■A 








1 ',-■.. • . 






f^T* 



>i ' 



> u. 



►Til 






;/v 



,"t 



/. 



-IN 






*8 



I" 

* t ' 






» ; ' 



/-r 



'T^s 



© 



.JJ 






■^ s'5 



A 

■■-;> » 



€r 



'"'* * ' '~~ 


-- 








/ 


f v' 


- 


>. 


''■ 


< 




®: 


r^ 


/ /■ V 






. <;^ 


* 




-V 


^ 


J'. 




v ■! ■" ». 


■' 


e^ 


<X ^ 


• V 


^■' 



. \ 



r ■ 



■-■^^ 






' V- v>;. 



-— X 







BR 

3 6105 038 "i»3~Si5" ^2[ 






I 




STANFORD UNIVERSITY UBRARIES 

STANR3RD, CAUFORNIA 

94305 




* N-«<-*.<